The Marriage that never was: The Catholic Annulment Process Explained
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 лип 2024
- Catholic annulment is a complicated process, but the principles at work are scripturally based applications of sacramental theology to individual situations and instances of human vice.
00:00 How the Bible understands marriage
01:02 Why the Catholic Church forbids divorce
01:51 What is an annulment?
03:26 Reasons an annulment might be granted
05:51 How dispensations from Canon Law work
07:01 The nullity process
07:40 How the marriage tribunal works
09:22 Judgment of the tribunal
Sources:
Matthew 19: bible.usccb.org/bible/matthew/19
The Code of Canon Law: www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iu...
Referenced canons are: 1060, 1055-1057, 1101, 1084, 1097-1098, 1091-1092, 1086, 1125, 1671-1673, 1683-1687, and 1400-1670 in general.
Catholic Diocese Map SVG courtesy of catholicmaps.gumroad.com/
Catechism #1661 (The Graces of Marriage): www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/16...
Catechism #2207: www.vatican.va/archive/ENG001...
Diocese of Indianapolis (Marriage Tribunal): tribunal.archindy.org/general...
Diocese of Sacramento (Explanation of the reasons for nullity): www.scd.org/sites/default/fil...
Affinity Contracted By Sponsors (Affinity through godparents etc): www.catholicapologetics.info/t...
Disparity of Cult defined: www.catholic.com/qa/mixed-mar...
Matthew 16: bible.usccb.org/bible/matthew...
The Council of Trent: en.wikisource.org/wiki/Canons...
Diocese of Winona-Rochester Libellus (Example of a Libellus): www.dowr.org/img/LIBELLUS%20r...
Canon Law Center Glossary of Canonical Terms: www.canonlawcentre.com/glossa...
Diocese of Raleigh (Explanation of what a tribunal is): dioceseofraleigh.org/tribunal...
Diocese of Hawaii (Cited for some contextual info I needed to understand some of the roles): www.catholichawaii.org/dioces...
Vatican Glossary: www.vatican.va/resources/reso...
Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus (The Bishops is required in expedited cases): www.vatican.va/content/france...
The USCCB approves the use of single judges instead of triplicate judges for nullity cases, the default is 3 according to canon 1425: www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-tea...
Diocese of Wilmington Q&A (the decision can be appealed to Rome): www.cdow.org/fresh/wp-content...
Honestly the wikipedia page for this super helpful if you want to get a big list of big reasons or remind yourself of one: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declara...
Justice and Mercy have met’s introduction was helpful for understanding the shorter process for nullity, but I ended up not going into detail on it in the actual video: www.amazon.com/Justice-Mercy-...
The sacrament never took , the sacrament never happened.
Therefore the marriage never happened.
My wife went to the altar with her fingers crossed behind her back.
She was protestant , but five years later her mother had to tell her she was.
She thought body and soul went to the grave as her atheist father though.
There was wife swapping in her family , three months after marriage i took a book on open marriage way from her. She signed that the children would be raised Catholic , but never ment to honor the agreement.
I didn't see the red flags , young and in love , blindly in love
With no one to tell me of the dangers.
Still bothering me to this day , am i free , but i have never remarried , i will not cut myself off from
Communion .
Put yourself forward for the annulment process that the truth may set you free, Do it early while witnesses are alive. It’s good to honour Christ but He is the truth so find out.Sometimes demons are sent out o steal destiny and put us off our destiny
@@savinggift158 the tribunal will annul anything that moves. And what basis is he not living the truth right now?
See it’s staunch but true, marriage is not ever to be dissolved.
Wrong. Catholic marriage. Not all marriages are Catholic marriages nor could all modern marriages meet the Catholic standards and requirements for marriage.
@@mpkropf5062 the Catholic Church is the representation of Jesus’s kingdom on earth. The Catholic Church is the actual embodiment of Jesus’s words and desires. the only people that have a hard time understanding this are the protestants, who base their entire religion off of false doctrine and counterfeit sacraments sold to them from the English Crowne.
@@mpkropf5062 Jesus is “The Word”, and his church is the Catholic Church, which is the physical embodiment of his kingdom on earth.
@@Nalot56 not the Church that was built upon a pagan Temple! That’s different from the First Century! First Church was called The Way and The RC claimed they wrote the Bible. Recently discovered the Ethiopian Bible was written 400-500 years before the Catholic Bible! There are some good things in the Church but also a lot of lies! Peter never once claimed to be the Pope and in fact he talked about such heresy in I Peter. I believe he would be very hurt to know he was buried between a pagan cemetery and the Vatican!! That’s disrespectful to build on top of a grave! Whether they are pagan or not! You really need to look at the hidden secrets under the Vatican. That should wake up every Catholic!
Thank you for making this very informative video.
this Video is made when I need it, Thank you
Thank you for this information 😊
You're welcome!
My current husband is an ex Member of the church of Ladder Day Saints, he was married civilly with his ex wife , marriage lasted 2 years. No children involved. The tribunal court denied their annulment.
We, however went to our local county clerks office and got married. We have a 3 year old and soon welcoming our 2nd son. 1st born was Baptized Catholic, and soon our 2nd one will be too.
I pray one day the judge will allow us to marry and we can be able to recieve our Lord in the Eucharist ❤️
Since baptisms carried out by Mormons are generally considered invalid, your husband would have had a "natural marriage" to his previous spouse because neither of them would actually be Christians. The bond of a natural marriage is real, but it can be dissolved by a sacramental union. This is called the Pauline Privilege, and (as far as I can tell from the limited info given here) would potentially apply in this case, but only if the previous spouse refused to allow the free exercise of Christianity when your husband converted.
Here are further details about Mormon baptism (and why it fails) from the Vatican website: www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20010605_battesimo_mormoni-ladaria_en.html
If a tribunal has clearly closed the door on a valid union between you and your husband, then I would seek to further understand why they did so - and try accept it as best you are able, which would include living a celibate life with your current spouse.
Mormon baptisms are invalid. Even if both your husband and his ex wife each received a valid baptism since the divorce, I believe it would be considered "ratum sed non consummatum" which can still be dissolved by the pope. If your husband is the only one of the two of them to get validly baptized since the divorce, then petrine privilege may be applied. If your husband is yet validly baptized, pauline privilege may be applied. I did notice that you omitted anything about your husband entering the Catholic faith. Am I wrong in assuming he is not currently a Catholic? Without any intention of entering into the Catholic faith, they'd have no reason to grant this privilege because it is called a privilege of the faith. If they did determine the marriage to be a valid natural marriage, the only way to resolve this is to appeal on different grounds or him becoming Catholic.
Such a good video, thanks
Thanks for this teaching! Can you go into what happens if a party appeals the annulment? What exactly does the Roman Rota do? Going thru this as my annulment was granted by my diocese and dealing with a vindictive ex who wants to stall things for me 😢 so he is appealing to Rome
I am sorry to hear about your situation. I confess that I do not know much about the appeals process as it was beyond the scope of my research. I will however say a prayer for you.
I know Timothy Gordon gave an examination how annulments skyrocketed and encouraged Catholics to appeal their annulment. This obviously upset a lot of Catholics. Jesus does explain three particular reasons why a marriage may not be valid in Matthew 19:12. An examination of this verse breaks down the reasons into mental, physical, and spiritual reasons. The channel gives numerous examples that may fall into these categories.
What is the legal definition of the "unitive" end?
Thank you for a very informative video.
You're welcome!
I prayed that I will become a successful Catholic Social Media Creator like you
A marriage bond is formed at the instant of consent. It never changes and disappears at death. As Paul VI says marriage "exists independent of love."
Yes, precisely. That is the point of the video.
"When someone seeks separation through the church," they must initiate an ecclesiastical trial to identify the innocent and the guilty spouse. Canons 1692-96.
Do marriages have to sacramental to be indissoluble?
All non-sacramental marriages are considered "natural" marriages by the Church. And while they have a conventional kind of permeance to them, they are not truly unbreakable in the same sense as a sacramental marriage.
This is the reason the Church permits the "Pauline Privilege", which can really dissolve a natural marriage such that it no longer exists. See my video from last year on this topic for more info: ua-cam.com/video/4Q--DcKwj6M/v-deo.htmlsi=WXKu7HKvmCx5-BM_
@@CatechesisVids I watched the video but still I wanted a deeper clarification in my mind. If a divorced non-Catholic was once married to a probably non Sacramental marriage or in the Catholic church and desire to convert to Catholiscm, is it Godly for him to marry a Catholic? Will it not contradict the 10 commandments (adultery) for both sides? Is this what it means that thier marriage was dissolved?
A natural marriage is between the unbaptized, ie a Hindu or Jew - not simply a non-Catholic. It's desirable that all marriages be perpetual, but a natural marriage can be dissolved while a sacramental one cannot because it better conforms to Eden and to Christ. Hence it is sometimes permitted. At the moment a new sacramental bond is established, the sacramental bond (of a couple exercising the Pauline Privilege) overwrites the flimsier natural bond that previously existed.
Christ's command that adultery applies to divorce also refers to sacramental bonds. Mosaic divorce does not seem to be adultery, as the bond was merely natural and could really be dissolved.
@@CatechesisVids Does a marriage desacralize if one of the persons apostatizes
@deusvult8340
A valid, consummated, sacramental marriage is dissolved by no power but death. It does not cease to be sacramental even if someone apostsizes; though one can reject the grace of baptism no one can erase its character on their soul which is perpetual.
My understanding of the Greek word ‘pornea’ is that it refers to sexual sin, and certain translations of the Bible called it adultery. It is the root of the word pornography.
It does refer to sexual sin, but the question is whether the sin precedes or follows the union. The Catholics see it as preceding the union, and therefore causing the marriage bond to not take place - making the union unlawful.
Please refer to my video on Orthodoxy for more details on the translation of that word.
ua-cam.com/video/BnM4nikAd7k/v-deo.htmlsi=320XWJkvzU-nu_KE
If annulment means the marriage never happened, then what’s the status of the children? Illegitimate ? Genuinely asking
Yep. Supposed to be.
Sort of, but legitimacy isn't really a modern category for most practical purposes since so many children are conceived out of wedlock today - and in any sense it's more of a legal category than a moral one; legally no, they are not illegitimate. Certainly the children of an invalid marriage should not feel guilty or anything like that.
The sexual acts performed by an invalid marriage are technically fornication, but only materially and not formally - ie there is no culpability - assuming they were not aware the marriage was invalid.
To answer that question, one must first define what an “illegitimate” child is, according to this specific doctrine/world view.
For that matter, it would also be helpful to similarly define a “legitimate” one and the same case.
I’m 67 and returned to the Catholic Church one year ago after lapsing for about 50 years. I married (20 years ago) a divorced Jewish Woman in a civil marriage who was previously married in a Jewish wedding and they produced one child. Their divorce was 30 years ago. I was not previously married or divorced. Is this a doomed situation if none of the conditions that you listed have been met?
Praise God for your return to the Church after a long absence, and I am sorry for the struggles and confusion surrounding your current situation.
A "worst case scenario" might be that you would need to live as brother and sister with your current spouse, if the Church does not consider your current union valid - ie to abstain from sex in order to continue to receive the sacrament of the eucharist.
It seems from the information you have given me, your present union is likely invalid - but I would speak to a diocesan expert or well educated priest who could give you further advice. Though sacramental marriage is not possible between a baptized person and an unbaptized person, it may be possible to form a valid so-called "natural" marriage - which is a real immaterial bond, though it lacks the added graces of the sacrament, and this type of union is permitted with a dispensation. Obviously however, the previous marriage of your current spouse presents some confusion on this point.
Though I have no idea if this is possible in your case, it seems like an ideal situation would be if your spouse came into the Catholic Church. If they did so, even if their previous (non sacramental) marriage was considered valid, it would be possible to dissolve or "overwrite" that previous bond with the stronger sacramental marriage. The Church calls this the "Pauline Privilege" after St. Paul, and I have an older video on it here: ua-cam.com/video/4Q--DcKwj6M/v-deo.htmlsi=4SR72T0JrrUrWFlW
Again you will need to clarify with an expert in canon law who can give you more clarity, but generally the fact that your current spouse is unbaptized may work in your favor from a canon law perspective. Do not despair, but hope and pray.
Thank you so much for your reply. I have a form here from the diocese and your video and reply are helping to overcome the resistance that I have been up against to face the tribunal.
Thank you again and may God bless you!
@@coydogvt - I believe you’re eligible for the annulment under the Pauline Privilege. I’ve heard the Apostle Paul readily recognized “mixed marriages” produced a particular problem. Unfortunately, I am not sure if this is in scripture itself. Jesus does explain three particular reasons why a marriage may not be valid in Matthew 19:12. An examination of this verse breaks down the reasons into mental, physical, and spiritual reasons. The channel gives numerous examples that may fall into these categories.
Speak to your pastor. Based on the description that you gave, your marriage in a civil ceremony constitutes an Absence of Form situation and renders that marriage invalid from the start. A baptized Catholic is bound to use Catholic form which begins with consulting the pastor and participating in marriage preparation sessions as governed by your diocese, as well as using the Catholic Rite of Matrimony.
It’s my wife who needs the annulment because she was married in a Jewish ceremony and then divorced over 30 years ago. Sorry that my initial post was confusing.
How does "a true lifelong bond" depend on one spouse's willingness to reconcile?
The Church generally presumes validity unless the contrary is proven.
@@CatechesisVids "generally?" Always. The church also says suspicion of invalidity can never justify unilateral separation on own authority.
So one of my brothers (we were all Catholics) married a non denominational protestant woman (I think one of those evangelicals) but they never got a dispensation. Instead they chose to be married by one of our uncles who is a pastor in another non denominational church (pentecostals) and sadly my nephews are not even baptised yet. He went through a very rough divorce after 10 years of marriage and went through a lot to get back on his feet. I pray he comes back to the one true Church founded by Jesus. So, knowing him I doubt he would like to get remarried, but would he need to get a proper annulment or something to go back to the Church? Or just a confession? What would he need to get my nephews baptised? They´re no loger children, they´re teenagers now.
I am sorry to hear about your brother, and that your nephews have not yet been baptized.
I don't know the circumstances of the divorce with regards to your brother, so he should consult a good priest as far as culpability (if he is willing). The Catechism says this about the topic, "It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage." Since the marriage is almost certainly not canonically valid, as far as I am aware the only thing barring your brother from receiving the eucharist and returning to Catholic life is a good confession.
As for baptism of your nephews, nothing at all prevents their coming into the Church and being baptized - but they would have to be willing to do so themselves (and become catechumens) because the Church considers them to have the use of reason once they are older than seven.
This article from Canon Law made easy may also be helpful for greater clarity on that point: canonlawmadeeasy.com/2014/01/09/canon-law-and-non-infant-baptism/
@@CatechesisVids thank you for your kind response. It happens that she cheated on my brother several times until he got enough and filed for civil divorce. Well, if I have the chance I'll let him know all of this.
No problem, good luck!
Jesus does explain three particular reasons why a marriage may not be valid in Matthew 19:12. An examination of this verse breaks down the reasons into mental, physical, and spiritual reasons. The channel gives numerous examples that may fall into these categories.
If pornea = invalid marriage, then divorce + annulment = no sin, right?
Materially, the couple would have been fornicating since they were not truly married. But formally, it's possible or even likely they believed themselves married - in which case they're not culpable.
@@CatechesisVids if all marriages are valid pre-annulment, then how could any divorce *not* be a sin?
Your question doesn't make sense as worded and I can't tell what you're asking.
@@CatechesisVids if the exception clause is (invalid marriage), then how can one act on that (divorce) while the marriage is still valid?
Divorce doesn't automatically mean the marriage is invalid. Divorce just means separation. A couple who are irreconcilably separated would divorce, and this civil act is an initial sign to the judge that the situation is irreconcilable and thus the nullity process can be pursued. I don't know if that's the same in every diocese. Either way, the Church condemns divorce *and remarriage* not divorce (insofar as one means by divorce, mere legal separation).
A secondary purpose by definition is not essential, and therefore it does not pertain to validity.
Any purpose the Church declares as essential is such.
Canon 1675 The judge "must be informed that the marriage has irreparably failed.." what authority must inform him?
My guy why did you leave like seven comments? That's too many. Your questions don't make sense and they're insufficiently worded for me to respond to them.
@@CatechesisVids I noticed you had Canon 1675 on your video. I noticed it says before an annulment case the judge must be informed that the marriage is irretrievably broken. If one spouse says it is and the other spouse says it's not, then how does the judge find out which one is correct?
@AnnulmentProof
Canon 1675 is about reconciling the union, but a nullity tribunal can proceed without the consent of both parties if that's what you're asking.
@@CatechesisVids no, I'm asking who is to inform the judge of "irreparable?"
I do not know who is responsible for that function.
If you 86 your spouse then you can remarry.
I have serious doubts whether the Catholic church has survived the enlightenment rationalism.
If by 86 you mean murder, that's actually an impediment to a new marriage called "Crimen". I didn't cover every possible reason for nullity.
Its okay as long as you do it before you meet your new spouse.
Most normal people wouldn't marry someone who had murdered a previous spouse. And it's a canonical impediment to marriage to lie about a defect of character that would make a spouse not marry you - so the new union would be invalid in any case, let alone that you'd have to find a priest willing to marry someone like that.
Sure.
I just find this almost geometric approach to moral theology so very strange and fragile.
But-that’s the west!
This is basically the slavophile critique of the western church but personally it resonates.
Reason and order are attributes that are perfectly expressed in God; the West correctly recognizes that his law can be learned and applied likewise with reason and order. It is nothing but pride to reject the truths of the faith for being too systematic and ironclad, for they are systematic because God is supremely ordered.
Openness to life is not a "core principle." It is the primary end.
Saying it is a core principle is not in conflict with its status as the primary end.
@@CatechesisVids how many ends can be primary at the same time?
The procreative end is primary, and the most important purpose of marriage. But it cannot be separated (at least in a sacramental union) from the unitive. This is what makes something like in vitro fertilization immoral as it is procreative but not unitive.
@@CatechesisVids can a natural conjugal act be non-unitive?
Of course. Take for example marital rape.
As long as the man does not bash his wife because of his infernally
What more must one be "capable" of doing besides an act suitable for the generation of children - for validity?
Many things. For example, mentally sound.
@@CatechesisVids mentally sound enough to do what exactly?
Commit to the action. Be of sound mind. Understand and act so as to enter into a lifelong bond.
@@CatechesisVids one must be capable of sound mind to commit to what action exactly?
Perform the sacrament of matrimony; to verbally commit oneself to a lifelong bond of husband and wife ordered to the procreation of offspring and the unity of both spouses.
Matt 19:9 means you can never divorce, but you can "put away" a guilty spouse. "Guilt" is. Unlawful. Zero to do with nullity. From the Douay Rheims commentary: "Except it be": In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living." U get this wrong in your video.
I'm starting to wonder if you're an AI. Your questions are so oddly worded and so numerous. It's not wrong in the video, it's just that you don't like the video's interpretation.
@@CatechesisVids I learned this from Cornelius a Lapide. Is the doay Rhiems commentary wrong?
The douay disagrees with the interpretation of the verse, so yes it conflicts with the interpretation of this video. But it agrees that the man may not remarry - ie, that the sacramental bond endures for all the days of the couples lives.
i was married to a catholic we divorced the marriage was not annuled i remarried my 2 husband died do i need to have the marriage be annulled
Catholic teaching is that a divorce never dissolves a bond - and has no effect on whether a marriage exists or not. If you were married in a valid Catholic ceremony, and you yourself are baptized, then your first marriage remains intact in the Catholic view. However, that's a lot of ifs since I do not know your specific situation. Please consult a diocesan expert or a solid priest for guidance on this.
If you married a Catholic woman who was divorced you cannot receive communion. But if you are convicted of a murder and are in prison but go to confession you can receive communion. Annulment is very expensive and no guarantee you will receive it.
I can sort of see where you are coming from, but there are a few problems with this analogy.
Firstly, Pope Francis made arrangements in 2015 for the nullity process to be free for impoverished petitioners - though I'm sure the application of that is more or less feasible depending on the financial health of the diocese. A canon lawyer is a real practitioner of law, and their time should be compensated fairly just like a doctor or a civil lawyer.
Secondly, the comparison to murder doesn't make sense. Someone who commits one instance of murder and then goes to prison need not be living in a perpetual state of sin since they are not continually murdering, but someone who "marries" a divorced person puts themselves in a perpetual state of sin where they are sinning constantly every time they fornicate with someone else's spouse.
The hypocrisy of the Church lmao
@@durimhalimi8974 if the hypocrisy ended today, how would you know?
If you had kids, you necessarily had capacity / discretion.
Huh? How?
@@CatechesisVids because the legal object of consent is to acts which generate children. Canon 1081 - §2.
"Matrimonial consent is an act of the will by which each party gives and accepts a perpetual and exclusive right over the body, for acts which are of themselves suitable for the generation of children."
@@CatechesisVids what does the church teach is the legal object of consent that one needs capacity/discretion for?
@@CatechesisVids what does the church teach is the legal object of consent that one needs capacity/discretion for?
Annulment meaning that the marriage never existed is an interesting notion when the marriage has produced children and the marriage clearly was consummated. It is a wonderful piece of intellectual gymnastics. Apparently it is easier to come up with such a conclusion if the parties seeking the annulment make a substantial donation.
"Annulment meaning that the marriage never existed is an interesting notion when the marriage has produced children"
The existence of children doesn't really have any bearing on the validity of the marriage unless it concerns something like inability to complete the sexual act - since that eliminates sexual inability as a possible reason for nullity.
"and the marriage clearly was consummated"
You may be thinking of ratum sed non consummatum, or the power of the pope to dissolve a marriage if it has not be consummated. That is not related to the discussion of annulment as such.
"It is a wonderful piece of intellectual gymnastics"
How? While certainly some diocese may abuse certain canons, that does not mean any of the principles at work in this video are faulty.
"Apparently it is easier to come up with such a conclusion if the parties seeking the annulment make a substantial donation."
Pope Francis declared in 2015 that the process should be made free for poor couples.
Certain diocese have a 100% declaration of nullity. Others over 95%. Under Canon 1095 any marriage can be annulled. Once one of the spouses declares “they never felt loved”
If you have a annulment past 1970 under canna 1095 and you were married for several years and have children then you have an invalid annulment
God will not be mocked
I dear family friend went into marriage with the full sacrament, after 8 yrs and 1 child they divorced as he came fukky clean that he was homosexual and could no longer "pretend". They divorced and then she seekend an annulment as he entered into the marriage contract under false pretenses.
@user-ne4ly3vh6b
I'm sure the "on the ground" situation for some diocese that are infiltrated by bad actors can be very bad, but that doesn't mean the canons themselves - or the principles at work - are bad, only that fallen men are. If a judge knowingly decides that a marriage is nullified that has no basis in fact, he will have to answer to God on the last day.
It all boils down to the same thing.
Many people are going to burn because they got fake annulments.
Our Lady told us the final battle would be over marriage and the family. She said many marriages were not good and are not of God. She's talking about annulments. When the communists got in the Vatican, they wanted to sabotage marriage.
It's only said foundations when the marriage is valid.
There is a need for annulment.
Anyone who tells you otherwise has never been connected to an invalid marriage.
@mpkropf5062
The litmus test for whether the nullity process is legitimate is whether it is opposed to Christ's teaching, not whether he specifically proposes that one do a specific legal practice. The video clearly outlines the scriptural evidence for annulment at the very start of the video.
There is no such thing as an essential "unitive end" of marriage. Just the fact that unitive has no legal definition disqualifies it. Procreation alone is essential. This is why annulments are never good for children, bc they rip nature.
Annulments aren't about the children as they are now, it's about the circumstances of the original bond.
Annulment of a marriage with children is about the children. It ruins their lives. Imagine spending Christmas morning with Mom and her new boyfriend. And Christmas afternoon with Dad and his new woman.
So sad.
No one needs to file for divorce or nullity. Carry your cross. Keep your anger and disappointments to yourself.
Any marriage that produces children should NEVER be annulled. The emotional toll on the child is devastating ( I know from experience). That is my I abandoned the catholic faith and am now a Christian
Though I am sorry to hear about your situation and I will pray for your return to the Church, it seems to me like you may not have watched the video. Firstly, as I said in the video, the Church does desire that couples dwelling together form a truly a lifelong bond - and reconcile if at all possible.
However, the nullity process does not base itself on what the couple want - or even what is "best" in the sense of social good - but only on what that couple has already done at the moment of their original wedding ceremony. If they made their marriage invalid through some particular error, they are not married. The Church does not "make" the union null, it merely recognizes that the union never took place. It is a recognition of a situation that already exists, and not a changing of situation.
Protestants(“Christian’s”) invented the notion of divorce though…. See king Henry the 8th.
Your parents are stilk your parents and You were already Christian, you merely became a Protestant.
So you abandoned annulment in favor of a religion that supports the far more open and available divorce? That sounds like regressive thinking.
@@CatechesisVids if the essence of marriage is procreation, then procreation proves capacity for validity. Since the primary purpose of marriage is good of the children, said annulments violate childrens / nature.
Baloney
The Sacrament of Marriage began in the garden of Eden between Adam, a man, and Eve, a woman He created them in His own Image.
@@lucillebonds2196 no no no
Dude, he said "no no no." Your argument is dismantled.
@@PopeUrbanII-ws7rm how so
@@PopeUrbanII-ws7rm pay to be part of the club,