This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Declaration of nullity article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Catholicism: Canon law High‑importance Declaration of nullity is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Catholic canon law task force (assessed as High-importance). Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : see Draft articles Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page) Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Whoever wrote the base article, you did a great job!! Thanks also to the other editors. I tried to refine this a bit, especially the legalities of annulments. I hope I made it clearer, but since I work with Canon Law professionally, I am not always sure if I made something clearer or too technical. DaveTroy 21:06, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church is copyrighted material; although it may be fair use in the United States, it may violate copyright if the article is displayed in a jurisdiction that does not recognize the fair-use doctrine, unless the copyright owner has granted permission. Has this been done? (As I understand, the Pope owns the copyright.) 69.140.164.142 04:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The way the current copyright has been enforced, as I understand it, you may only use two paragraphs block text without sending the work to a censor (fact checker if you will) for doctrinal correctness. However, you can use the Catechism as a reference, provided you aren't actually "quoting" (ex. The Church teaches.......cf. CCC ##).DaveTroy 15:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand (I believe there is a source for that) the Catechism is free to use for any missionary activity, which includes informing people about what the Catholic Church says. --93.135.33.66 (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Starting the first of many drafts and rewrites. There is no historical background, and this does not present a modern worldview. True historical background (minus onesided beliefs), as well as all Vatican publications should be integrated. Missclark (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the last paragraph of the section "Grounds for Nullity", since it uses wrong terminology (a declaration of annulment is not a 'dispensation'), gives an inaccurate account of the position of Benedict XVI (suggesting that it is an ideological stance when it simply corresponds to the exact requirements of canon 1095), makes unsupported hypotheses about the possible influence of Archbishop Raymond Burke in the matter; and, not least, because its main source (as appears from its note 12) is an interview with an ex-priest on an Australian radio program. It is not true that Benedict and John Paul II before him have been "critical of dispensations for purely psychological reasons". They have criticized annulments based on the supposition of some simple immaturity at consent; and have called for a proper interpretation of canon 1095 as given in the 1983 Code. Canon 1095 allows for declarations of nullity based on psychological grounds, but specifies that the psychic defect involved at consent must have been grave and must have related to the essential rights and obligations of marriage.Unimpeder (talk) 09:46, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Declaration of nullity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081231232033/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/ENG1104/__P3V.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3V.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140624154033/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Declaratory judgement of nullity" is a more correct definition sourced here. In the new York State, declaratory shiws effect soly within judiciable cases and "declaratory judgments are available for the determination of certain matrimonial rights" (Canonical and Civil Matrimonial Actions: A Comparison, p. 10). "Declaratory judgement of nullity" translateds the Italian declaratoria di nullità (examples: diritto.it; tribunaleinterdiocesanosiculo.it; a civil sentence and an ecclesiastical one).

Properly, nobody, even the Pope, has the right to divide what God has made one flesh (Mt 19,5–6 and 1Cor 7,10–11). Those verses arent' yet sourced in the article. Implied by those verses, there exists a basic distinction between what become null form a certain time onwards and what was null since the time of its begining. For the Roman Catholic marriage, the second hypothesis is the unique admitted. It is uncluear and not yet specified in the article the canonical law in cases of rape, abortion, or adultery which were committed after the nuptials.

Thirdly, canonical and civil law of lay jurisdictions share some excusations for declaring null a marriage, like the circumvention of an incapable. But similar cases shall be verified before the marriage by work of the celebrating priest. For this reason, a decision held by the civil tribunal is capable of explaining effects on an ecclesiastical tribunal (and vice versa).Theologian81sp (talk) 11:52, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]