Annulment question

Started by Bataar, May 15, 2024, 02:13:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bataar

What if a couple got married outside of the church and weren't even Catholic at the time? Would a completely secular marriage be more likely to have a valid annulment as the couple were not trained or taught the seriousness of it? Obviously, we don't know for sure, but this was something I was wondering about so any thoughts would be appreciated.

KreKre

#1
Quote from: Bataar on May 15, 2024, 02:13:09 PMcompletely secular marriage
There is no such thing as a "secular marriage". Marriage is a sacrament. If there is no sacrament, there is no marriage. If there is no marriage, there is nothing to annul.

A man and a woman who pretend they are married and live that way, when they in fact are not married, are living in sin. They can separate whenever one of them fancies. There is nothing holding them together, because sin is not a force that unites, but a force that divides and destroys.

But, if they honestly repent and confess their sins, assuming they are baptized and confirmed, they can receive the sacrament of marriage (with each other, or find someone else), and this union, which is so pleasing to God, cannot be broken by any man, and lasts until death separates them.
Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!

Michael Wilson

It depends: two baptized non-Catholics who get married are validly married; because a marriage between two baptized people is always a sacrament. Two unbaptized people can marry validly, but their marriage can be annulled because the marriage between two unbaptized people is not a sacrament.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

Stubborn

Quote from: KreKre on May 15, 2024, 03:18:17 PM
Quote from: Bataar on May 15, 2024, 02:13:09 PMcompletely secular marriage
There is no such thing as a "secular marriage". Marriage is a sacrament. If there is no sacrament, there is no marriage. If there is no marriage, there is nothing to annul.

A man and a woman who pretend they are married and live that way, when they in fact are not married, are living in sin. They can separate whenever one of them fancies. There is nothing holding them together, because sin is not a force that unites, but a force that divides and destroys.

But, if they honestly repent and confess their sins, assuming they are baptized and confirmed, they can receive the sacrament of marriage (with each other, or find someone else), and this union, which is so pleasing to God, cannot be broken by any man, and lasts until death separates them.

There are a way more peculiarities to this sacrament than all the other sacraments combined, which is a reason I rarely add my .02 on the subject, but the above post is blatantly wrong.

The validity of the marriage is not dependent on whether it is sacramental or not, the Church initially recognizes all marriages as valid because of the Marriage Contract - you can look this up. In a nutshell, it is the Marriage Contract that binds, not the sacrament. It is the Sacrament that helps the couple live up to that contract until the end of their life....in a nutshell.

As long as both parties were free to marry in the first place and they both said the words "I do," that marriage is presumed valid by the Church whether prot jew, hindu, etc., including if one or both are not baptized, although in this last instance things get a bit more complicated, but she *initially* presumes  or at least recognizes this as a valid marriage as well. You can look up "Pauline Privilege" and "Petrine Privilege."

The reasons for the *initial* presumption of validity of all marriages where both parties were free to marry is, as always, for the good of souls - the souls of all those involved, to avoid scandal, for the good of the children, family and society. Needless to say, valid marriages can never be annulled.   

   
Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent

KreKre

#4
From the Catechism of St. Pius X:

Nature of the Sacrament of Matrimony

1 Q. What is the sacrament of Matrimony?
A. Matrimony is a sacrament, instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, which creates a holy and indissoluble union between a man and woman, and gives them grace to love one another holily and to bring up their children as Christians.

2 Q. By whom was Matrimony instituted?
A. Matrimony was instituted by God Himself in the Garden of Paradise, and was raised to the dignity of a sacrament by Jesus Christ in the New Law.

3 Q. Has the sacrament of Matrimony any special signification?
A. The sacrament of Matrimony signifies the indissoluble union of Jesus Christ with the Church, His Spouse, and our holy Mother.

4 Q. Why do we say that the bond of marriage is indissoluble?
A. We say that the bond of marriage is indissoluble or that it cannot be dissolved except by the death of either husband or wife, because God so ordained from the beginning and so Jesus Christ our Lord solemnly proclaimed.

5 Q. Can the contract be separated from the sacrament in Christian marriage?
A. No, in marriage among Christians the contract cannot be separated from the sacrament, because, for Christians, marriage is nothing else than the natural contract itself, raised by Jesus Christ to the dignity of a sacrament.

6 Q. Among Christians, then, there can be no true marriage that is not a sacrament?
A. Among Christians there can be no true marriage that is not a sacrament.


7 Q. What effects does the sacrament of Matrimony produce?
A. The sacrament of matrimony: (1) Gives an increase of sanctifying grace; (2) Gives a special grace for the faithful discharge of all the duties of the married state.

...

23 Q. What is a civil marriage?
A. It is nothing but a mere formality prescribed by the [civil] law to give and insure the civil effects of the marriage to the spouses and their children.


24 Q. Is it sufficient for a Christian to get only the civil marriage or contract?
A. For a Christian, it is not sufficient to get only the civil contract, because it is not a sacrament, and therefore not a true marriage.

25 Q. In what condition would the spouses be who would live together united only by a civil marriage?
A. Spouses who would live together united by only a civil marriage would be in an habitual state of mortal sin, and their union would always be illegitimate in the sight of God and of the Church.

26 Q. Should we also get the civil marriage?
A. We should perform the civil marriage, because, though it is not a sacrament, it provides the spouses and their children with the civil effects of conjugal society; for this reason, the ecclesiastical authority as a general rule allows the religious marriage only after the formalities prescribed by the civil authorities have been accomplished.
Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!

Stubborn

Quote from: KreKre on May 16, 2024, 09:55:27 AMFrom the Catechism of St. Pius X:

Nature of the Sacrament of Matrimony...

Yes, unlike the OP, everything you posted from the catechism pertains to Catholics, they use the word "Christians." But the simplest way to look at it - without taking a theology course on the sacrament of matrimony - is no matter who or what the religion/no religion of the couple is, if they were both free to marry and both said the words "I Do" the Church always initially presumes validity whether sacramental or not, and again, for very good reason.



Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent

KreKre

#6
Quote from: Stubborn on May 16, 2024, 12:20:36 PMCatholics, they use the word "Christians."
It's the same thing. Those who reject the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Christ, they reject Christ, so they cannot be called Christians, except colloquially.

Quote from: Stubborn on May 16, 2024, 12:20:36 PMis no matter who or what the religion/no religion of the couple is, if they were both free to marry and both said the words "I Do" the Church always initially presumes validity whether sacramental or not, and again, for very good reason.
Could you share some references to support that claim? Some older than Vatican II, preferably.
Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!

LausTibiChriste

You're wrong Chris, get over it
Lord Jesus Christ, Son Of God, Have Mercy On Me A Sinner

Bataar

Let's say a protestant woman marries a protestant man in a protestant service. They don't get the same training / lessons that Catholics do prior to marriage and in the back of their mind, they get married believing if things don't work out, divorce is an option. Let's say that later on this couple does divorce and one of them, after the divorce becomes a Catholic and would like to be married in the church if they ever meet someone. Hypothetically, would this person be able to receive a valid annulment? Obviously none of us can state with 100% certainty (I don't think) so I'm just looking to see what people generally assume.

Michael Wilson

The question you ask is quite common here in the U.S. Because of the high rate of divorce; but again a marriage between two baptized people is considered a Sacrament and therefore cannot be dissolved; Now if the above mentioned Protestants had made some public declaration before they married that they were only going to do so for a limited number of years; or that they were not intending to have any children; then that would put into doubt their intention to enter into a permanent union or for the primary end of matrimony.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

Stubborn

Quote from: Michael Wilson on May 16, 2024, 05:16:42 PMThe question you ask is quite common here in the U.S. Because of the high rate of divorce; but again a marriage between two baptized people is considered a Sacrament and therefore cannot be dissolved; Now if the above mentioned Protestants had made some public declaration before they married that they were only going to do so for a limited number of years; or that they were not intending to have any children; then that would put into doubt their intention to enter into a permanent union or for the primary end of matrimony.
Exactly. I'm pretty sure their bad intentions wouldn't matter. I'm also pretty sure it would matter only to the NO, but who knows? 
Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent

Stubborn

Quote from: KreKre on May 16, 2024, 01:05:30 PM
Quote from: Stubborn on May 16, 2024, 12:20:36 PMis no matter who or what the religion/no religion of the couple is, if they were both free to marry and both said the words "I Do" the Church always initially presumes validity whether sacramental or not, and again, for very good reason.
Could you share some references to support that claim? Some older than Vatican II, preferably.

I am mainly relying on my memory from studying the whole marriage [in]validity question over 40 years ago using seminary theology manuals, encyclopedias, encyclicals etc., which is why I just went straight to the jist and put it very simply and in a nutshell with "I Do = valid." Which is nothing more than free advice to other laymen - it really is very good advice for all trads seeking a spouse - even tho there is so much more to it than that - most (nearly always) this is the final result anyway. This is the reason there were so few annulments pre-V2.

It is because the Church is the sole owner, preserver and protector of the sacrament that validity is always *initially* presumed among *all* those who were free to marry in the first place - regardless if they were Catholic or not.

If I get the time, I will see if I can find some traditional info to post here, in the mean time, I found and listened to this last night, it's pretty good. Fr. Wathen pretty much cuts to the chase. Skip to about  7:30 for what he says about marriage.   
Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent

Michael Wilson

QuoteExactly. I'm pretty sure their bad intentions wouldn't matter. I'm also pretty sure it would matter only to the NO, but who knows?
Any kind of agreement before the taking of the vows that was against the integrity of the marriage, would invalidate it. For example, an agreement that the marriage would be "open" i.e. the couples could have relations with other people, is against the bond of the exclusive right of the spouse to the body of their spouse. An agreement not to have any children; is against the primary end of the sacrament; and would also invalidate it.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers

Bonaventure

Quote from: Stubborn on May 17, 2024, 06:37:49 AM
Quote from: KreKre on May 16, 2024, 01:05:30 PM
Quote from: Stubborn on May 16, 2024, 12:20:36 PMis no matter who or what the religion/no religion of the couple is, if they were both free to marry and both said the words "I Do" the Church always initially presumes validity whether sacramental or not, and again, for very good reason.
Could you share some references to support that claim? Some older than Vatican II, preferably.

I am mainly relying on my memory from studying the whole marriage [in]validity question over 40 years ago using seminary theology manuals, encyclopedias, encyclicals etc., which is why I just went straight to the jist and put it very simply and in a nutshell with "I Do = valid." Which is nothing more than free advice to other laymen - it really is very good advice for all trads seeking a spouse - even tho there is so much more to it than that - most (nearly always) this is the final result anyway. This is the reason there were so few annulments pre-V2.

It is because the Church is the sole owner, preserver and protector of the sacrament that validity is always *initially* presumed among *all* those who were free to marry in the first place - regardless if they were Catholic or not.

If I get the time, I will see if I can find some traditional info to post here, in the mean time, I found and listened to this last night, it's pretty good. Fr. Wathen pretty much cuts to the chase. Skip to about  7:30 for what he says about marriage.   

Correct.

Remember when Bergo flipped this on its head?

QuotePope Francis said Thursday that many sacramental marriages today are not valid, because couples do not enter into them with a proper understanding of permanence and commitment.

While he initially said in unscripted comments that "the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null," he later approved a revision of these remarks.

When the Vatican released its official transcript of the encounter the following day, they had changed the comment to say that "a portion of our sacramental marriages are null."

Stubborn

Quote from: Michael Wilson on May 17, 2024, 05:31:06 PM
QuoteExactly. I'm pretty sure their bad intentions wouldn't matter. I'm also pretty sure it would matter only to the NO, but who knows?
Any kind of agreement before the taking of the vows that was against the integrity of the marriage, would invalidate it. For example, an agreement that the marriage would be "open" i.e. the couples could have relations with other people, is against the bond of the exclusive right of the spouse to the body of their spouse. An agreement not to have any children; is against the primary end of the sacrament; and would also invalidate it.
You could be right Michael, but the thing to keep always in the forefront is that the Church stands like a firm backstop with or for the sacrament at all times and all circumstances *initially,* even when the marriage is not sacramental and is indeed able to be annulled.

By that I mean the Church (Marriage Tribunal) *might* first, *only consider* annulling a marriage where one or both are un-baptized, and even then would only give it actual or a more serious consideration if one of the spouses wanted to convert to the Catholic faith but the other spouse refused. IOW, it's not a sure thing, it's never a sure thing.

Supposing this above annulment was actually being considered, they first try to save that marriage. For example, they could (and likely would) insist the converting spouse spend a year or more (or less) trying to convert the other spouse, or make them separate for some period of time, or prohibit them from separation, or anyone of a multitude of other efforts, all aimed at preserving that marriage - always for the good and the salvation of all involved before there could be any hope of actually having that marriage annulled. Even if it was finally determined that the other spouse's conversion would never happen, the Church could STILL deny an annulment.

That is how it used to be. This is why annulments were so rare they were almost unheard of pre-V2. The Church, we might say is steadfastly vehement or ferocious in her defense and preservation of the sacraments, all of them, but more especially I think when it comes to this sacrament.         

Which is why I think the safest and simplest way to look at it is if they said: "I Do = valid."               
Even after a long life of sin, if the Christian receives the Sacrament of the dying with the appropriate dispositions, he will go straight to heaven without having to go to purgatory. - Fr. M. Philipon; This sacrament prepares man for glory immediately, since it is given to those who are departing from this life. - St. Thomas Aquinas; It washes away the sins that remain to be atoned, and the vestiges of sin; it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person, arousing in him a great trust and confidence in the divine mercy. Thus strengthened, he bears the hardships and struggles of his illness more easily and resists the temptation of the devil and the heel of the deceiver more readily; and if it be advantageous to the welfare of his soul, he sometimes regains his bodily health. - Council of Trent