(Quote) Bernard-2709 said:
"Prenuptial agreements can bring validity into question when they center around disp...
(Quote) Bernard-2709 said:
"Prenuptial agreements can bring validity into question when they center around disposition of assets in case of divorce. You can see by the canons above that marriage is permanent partnership. However, a prenuptial agreement with asset allocation in case of divorce brings in to question both Canon 1101-- the agreement is a positive act that excludes an essential property of marriage (permanence). Also, Canon 1102 specifically says marriage cannot be subject to future conditions."
"Each diocese has their own process, but during marriage prep you would be asked about any prenuptial agreement. If you have one, it would have to be investigated and could be an impediment to proceeding with the marriage. If it's based on divorce-- it's almost certainly invalidates consent. You would have to rescind such an agreement before being allowed to proceed with marriage."
"In the case of widows/widowers setting up inheritance rights for children of the first marriage upon death (NOT divorce) the church does not consider consent to have been compromised." forums.catholic.com
Can. 1101 §1. The internal consent of the mind is presumed to conform to the words and signs used in celebrating the marriage.
§2. If, however, either or both of the parties by a positive act of the will exclude marriage itself, some essential element of marriage, or some essential property of marriage, the party contracts invalidly.
Can. 1102 §1. A marriage subject to a condition about the future cannot be contracted validly.
§2. A marriage entered into subject to a condition about the past or the present is valid or not insofar as that which is subject to the condition exists or not.
§3. The condition mentioned in §2, however, cannot be placed licitly without the written permission of the local ordinary.
Thanks for this information, Bernard. I had a discussion about pre-nups. with someone recently, and was very surprised
that he thought that having one would be essential to any marriage he would engage in in the future.
I supposed my thinking on these was ambigous, but at that very moment, like Private Benjamin, I felt the urge that what he said did not set well with me at all. Not at all!
For one thing, I don't care for the presupposition that I am a gold digger, and that someone needs to be protected from me, in my own marriage.
For another thing, many marriable female persons also have assets that would be taken into a marriage.
Mostly, It throws a giant rock into the idea of joining in marriage, under God, and the two becoming one family unit instead of two individuals. I guess I am just a Romantic in that respect, and I can still see that happening, even though I am 51, and not yet married ever.
This information throws some validity into the picture, that a pre-nup has no valid place in a Catholic marriage.