The Grounds
Most cases that come before the Tribunal will be handled by way of the formal
process, meaning that it is being argued that the matrimonial consent of one or
both of the parties was in some way faulty. The grounds of nullity described in
this section refer to this issue of the consent of the parties. Grounds are
the legal basis for requesting a juridical action, such as declaring a marriage
invalid. A marriage may have been doomed before its beginning because one of
the spouses was so hopelessly selfish that he or she would never contribute to
the well-being of another person. Although this selfishness was the real
barrier to the celebration of a Christian marriage, it is not a possible ground
for nullity. An appropriate ground in this case might be “lack of due
discretion”. Multiple grounds can be suggested in a libellus, and they should be if
the case warrants them. Further investigation conducted later in the
proceedings may find that a ground which looked quite promising early in the
proceedings cannot be substantiated by the evidence, but what seemed to be a
less likely ground actually proved to be the basis for nullity.
What follows are grounds enunciated in the 1983 Code of Canon Law and used in the Marriage Tribunal of the Diocese
of Crookston. If you have any questions on a specific case, please call the
Tribunal at 218-281-4533.
LACK OF REASON
The marriage covenant comes into existence by means of the valid exchange of
consent (c. 1057). If a person lacks the use of sufficient reason so as to not know
what s/he is doing at the time consent is exchanged, then there is no true
consent. In other words, those who do not have sufficient use of reason are
incapable of entering marriage. This incapacity may be temporary or permanent.
A number of causes can give rise to this incapacity; they range from psychotic
states to temporary lack of reason arising from excessive use of alcohol or
other drugs; severe mental retardation can also deprive a person of sufficient
use of reason. A person in such a situation is incapable of a human act which
presupposes capacity, knowledge and free will. This ground is only used in the
severest of cases because it calls into question the person’s ability to ever
enter into a valid marriage. Proving this ground often requires medical
documentation regarding the manifestation of the illness.
LACK OF DUE
DISCRETION
This means that the person exercised poor judgment in entering into marriage.
For some reason the person was not able to properly evaluate what s/he was
undertaking, or to act in accord with good judgment. It must be a grave lack of
discretion of judgment regarding essential matrimonial rights and duties which
are to be mutually given and accepted (c. 1095.2). This is a very common ground,
and encompasses many different situations, such as: gross immaturity, unwanted
pregnancy, escape from an unhappy home life, substance abuse, emotional
problems, etc.
INCAPACITY TO ASSUME THE OBLIGATIONS
OF MARRIAGE
This means that for some reason the party lacked the necessary psychological
integration for someone entering marriage. It refers to a person who is not
capable of assuming the essential obligations of marriage due to causes of a
psychic nature (c. 1095.3). Personality, anxiety and schizophrenic disorders
are such factors. Likewise, severe alcoholism and homosexual orientation would
render a person incompetent to enter marriage. A simple statement that a person
is homosexual or schizophrenic is not sufficient to indicate that s/he in fact
is. Evidence in support of this assertion would be required.
DEFECTIVE CONVALIDATION
This means that the couple was in an invalid marriage (usually due to a lack of
canonical form), and later they had the marriage validated before a priest or
deacon. However, this attempt at validation lacked something essential for
marriage. Why? Some Catholics and practically every non-Catholic consider
validations as mere “blessings” of a prior marriage, or simple ceremonies to be
celebrated for the satisfaction of someone else. With this mentality, new
consent (i.e. a new decision to marry) was not elicited as legally required (c.
1157). There must be a new act of the will together with knowledge or suspicion
of nullity of the prior invalid bond (usually the civil ceremony). Please note
that there has been a change in the law. In marriages that took place before November
27, 1983, (when the new Code came into effect), all baptized parties had to
make this new commitment. After this date, only Catholics have to make this renewal
of consent (c. 1156-1160).
However, whenever a non-Catholic convalidates
marriage with a Catholic, the non-Catholic is bound to elicit new consent (c.
1059). In other words, the person(s) must recognize that the first ceremony was
invalid, and must make a new act of consent to their partner. In this
situation, the civil marriage has no canonical relevance.
TOTAL SIMULATION
It is presumed that the internal consent of the mind
conforms with the words used in the marriage ceremony. If marriage itself or
some essential element or property of marriage is withheld by a positive act of
the will then the marriage is invalid (c. 1101). In cases of simulation, there
are two distinct acts of the will: 1) the positive intention of not marrying,
and 2) the positive intention of giving the apparent manifestation of consent
which the person knows to be false. Total simulation refers to the internal
withholding of consent to the marriage itself. Partial simulation refers to
withholding consent to an essential element or property of marriage - i.e.
intention against fidelity, indissolubility, children or the community of life.
In cases of total simulation, the Tribunal will attempt to discover the
motivations for such an action. Why did the person exclude marriage itself? Witness
testimony will be essential in order to find in the affirmative on this ground.
One of the most common examples of total simulation is a person who marries to
obtain
INTENTION AGAINST FIDELITY
This means that one party did not include fidelity to the other spouse as part
of his/her matrimonial consent (c. 1056). This “non-inclusion” must be present,
at least incipiently, prior to the marriage. A simple act of adultery does not
constitute the ground. The person must have entered the marriage in question
with at least the unconscious reservation that s/he was free to enter into
intimate relationships with persons other than the spouse.
INTENTION AGAINST INDISSOLUBILITY
This means that a party in the marriage did not believe that s/he was bound to
this marriage for the duration of his or her life (c. 1056). People often enter
marriage with an attitude which can be called the ‘divorce mentality’.
INTENTION AGAINST CHILDREN
This means that one or both parties never included the procreation and
education of children as an integral part of the marriage covenant (c. 1055).
At times this intention is stated before the wedding, or may have simply gone unstated.
At other times, the possibility of children is not excluded, but the intention
to bring children into the world is so vague as to be practically meaningless.
INTENTION AGAINST THE COMMUNITY OF
LIFE
This is a rather new ground, and it speaks of the covenant relationship between
the two spouses - the partnership of the whole of life (c. 1055). It addresses
the ability of the spouses to enter into an interpersonal relationship as
equals in this covenant.
CONDITION
This means that some qualification is attached to the marriage, so that if the
condition is not fulfilled the marriage is not considered valid by the party (c.
1102). An example of such a condition would be a person who so repulsed by the
use of alcohol that s/he will only marry a person if s/he does not drink.
FORCE AND FEAR
This refers to the cases in which a person marries only because s/he gravely
fears for his or her well-being (c. 1103). The fear must be extrinsic, and
causative of the marriage. In other words the person is compelled to choose
marriage to be freed from this force and fear. The most obvious example is a
‘shot gun wedding”.
IGNORANCE
For matrimonial consent to be valid it is necessary that the parties at least
not be ignorant that marriage is a permanent consortium between a man and a
woman which is ordered toward the procreation of offspring by means of some
sexual cooperation. Such ignorance is not presumed after puberty (c. 1096).
Ignorance in this case is usually considered to be a state of mind, something
habitual, and not passing. However, this is a very difficult ground to prove.
ERROR OF PERSON
This means error about a physical person (c. 1097.1). This would be the case if
someone is substituted for the actual person one intends to marry (e.g. the
case of twins). Again, this ground is rarely used.
ERROR OF A QUALITY OF A PERSON
A quality is some aspect of the person chat contributes to the overall shaping of the personality. Such qualities may be moral, physical, social, religious, or legal. In other words, s/he implicitly conditions the marriage upon the existence of that quality (c. 1097.2)
FRAUD
This refers to cases when a person is led into marriage by deceit. The deceit
has to be perpetrated to obtain consent, and it must concern some quality of
the person which of its very nature would seriously disturb the partnership of
conjugal life (c. 1098). The whole focus here is that one party conceals some
fact or quality so that the other party will consent to marriage. An example: a
person conceals the fact that they were previously married because the intended
spouse would refuse to marry someone who had been previously married.
CONSENT DEFECTIVE IN ITS FORMAL
OBJECT (DETERMINING ERROR)
This ground is based on c. 1057.2, which states that marital consent is an act
of the will by which a man and a woman, through an irrevocable covenant,
mutually give and accept each other to establish marriage. Therefore, the
formal object of marital consent is the right to acts of heterosexual
intercourse, and the right to the community of the whole of life. This is the
object of marriage as set forth by the church, and the object of the couple’s
consent must correspond to it. With this ground what the Tribunal will attempt
to determine is whether the party’s consent included the two elements mentioned
above, or if the person substitute his or her own object of consent in their
place.
UNDISPENSED IMPEDIMENTS
A marriage may be invalid because some impediment was not dispensed. These situations
are usually handled as a Documentary Case, and will not generally be processed
by the Marriage Tribunal. For your information, the following is a list of
impediments.
Lack of age - for baptized
Catholics, a man must be 16 years of age and a woman must. be
14 years of age to marry.
Impotence - it must be antecedent to
the marriage and perpetual. This affects Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
Prior bond of marriage - sometimes
called ‘ligamen”. This means that a person is bound
to a previous union. This is more common among non-Catholics. This impediment
affects all people.
Disparity of Cult - when a Catholic
married a non-baptized person. It does not apply to marriages between a baptized
non-Catholic and a non-baptized person.
Sacred Orders - if a person is an
ordained priest and has not been dispensed from the obligation of celibacy.
Public perpetual vow of chastity -
this concerns persons who are members of certain religious institutes.
Abduction - refers to a man who
abducts or detains a woman for the purpose of marriage. It does not apply to a
woman who abducts a man for this purpose, and only applies to Catholics.
Consanguinity and Affinity — certain
degrees of familial and marital relationships can invalidate marriage. This
applies to Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
Public propriety - results from
public and notorious concubinage. After a common life
is established it sets up an impediment for marriage between the individual and
the first degree in direct line (son or daughter) of the “significant other”.
This impediment affects Catholics only.
Legal Relationship - refers to
relationships due to adoption, and follows the same norms as the civil law.
Crime - refers to bringing about the
death of one’s own spouse or another’s spouse for the purpose of marriage.
Also, mutual physical or moral cooperation would fall under this heading. This
impediment affects Catholics only.
PAPAL DISSOLUTIONS
These are sometimes called Privilege of the Faith cases. It involves marriages where one or both parties is a non-baptized person, and one of the parties wants to become a Catholic or marry a Catholic. There are certain conditions that must be met, and the applications are reviewed for this purpose.