www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Marriage and annulment

In the Latin and Oriental Traditions, a marriage must be entered into by free volition (among other things) in order to be a true marriage (i.e., Sacrament).

In all the polemics surrounding this issue, I get the impression that in the Eastern Tradition, only the blessing of the priest matters for a marriage to be a true marriage. But I wanted to get a verification or correction from my Eastern brethren.

Does the Eastern (i.e. Byzantine) Tradition:
(1) recognize that there are certain marriages that were never true marriages and thus grounds for a declaration of annulment?
(2) recognize that a marriage that has not been entered into under full volition by the parties is not a true marriage.

Blessings,
Marduk

I have an interesting question for which no one has ever given me a good answer along these lines.

How does the Church, whether Eastern or Western, see an arranged marriage when one of the parties does not give consent unless under the threat of a beating by a parent?

Bob

Both Western (CIC 1103) and Eastern (CCEO 825) Catholic Canon Law recognize consent as essential to marraige and state that a marriage entered into under threat of force or grave fear is invalid.

I have an even better case - how is it that someone who was married for twenty years and more with two children can now obtain (and has indeed obtained) an annulment?

What "canon law" covers off that?

Is this not simply "Catholic divorce" under another name with what, in hockey, they call "real fast-sticking?"

Alex

Thank you for the response, brother. As per the stated purpose of this site, I am actually particularly interested in the Eastern Orthodox position.

Blessings,
Marduk

Dear brother ALex,

Didn't that occur with a Kennedy? IIRC, Rome overturned that annulment (as it did thousands of others) - or perhaps you are referring to another case. Rome obviously does not approve of this "annulment as Catholic divorce" mentality that might be prevalent in Western countries.

Blessings,
Marduk

The "stated purpose" of the site does not specify the Eastern Orthodox view, it specifies an Eastern Christian view. You didn't specify that you wanted an Eastern Orthodox view, I have provided an Eastern Christian view, though not an Eastern Orthodox view.

Theophan specifically asked about either the Latin or the Eastern view, so I posted about both, from the point of view of the Catholic Church, which is both Latin and Eastern.

The Byzantine Churches do recognize annulments as well as divorces ( as is noted previously on this forum here, for example, which specifically discusses the issues of consent, intimidation, etc.)

An old set of ROCOR statutes confirms the existence of annulments in the Orthodox Byzantine Churches here [russianorthodoxchurch.ws]:

Christ is risen!

The only application I've heard of that involved one of the couple having had a sex change. Yes, that would be void.

Here's a manual for Russian Consular officers from 1917 [archive.org] that discusses a variety of possible reasons for annulments. The reasons include force, fraud or coercion, insanity, consaguinaity, bigamy, under or overage, not having permission to remarry after divorce, etc.

But why are current Catholic annulments such, for want of a better word, "jokes?"

Psychological incompatibility? My wife could get annulment of our marriage four days out of seven on those grounds!

Alex

Psychological incompatibility is not grounds for an annulment, only psychological incapacity to consent to marriage.

OK, if you say so.

But someone I know rather well and who is related just got an annulment after 20 years of marriage and two children.

Under what conditions could such a situation be considered worthy of an annulment (since the person in question won't tell me the grounds so I don't know)?

An annulment with two kids? The kids are very hurt about this as well.

Alex

Many Latin marriage tribunals employ a kind of tautological argument when using the most common reasons for granting a decree of nullity--"defect of intent" and "defect of understanding". In effect, the failure of the marriage itself is adduced as evidence that either one or both parties failed to understand the meaning of marriage or entered into it with the proper intent. Had they possessed proper understanding and intent, the marriage would not have broken down. Hard to argue with that kind of reasoning, though I must say, it's so cynical as to undermine any faith in the system whatsoever--and I went to a Jesuit university.

Dear Stuart,

Thank you for your comprehensive answer!

I'm both happy and sad that I know more about this process now . . . have a very good night.

Your servant,

Alex