andDr. Loughnane asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware of the large number of annulments now being granted by the Catholic Church; and if, in view of the legal position that arises from these annulments, he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Marriage Annulments.
16.
I am aware that in the past year or so there has been an increase in annulments granted by the religious tribunals of the Roman Catholic Church. Persons who obtain such annulments are not, of course, free to remarry unless they obtain an annulment in the civil courts. The civil law relating to nullity is at present being examined.
Are these people not entitled to get married again under Church laws?
Yes, if people get an annulment from the Church, then in the eyes of the Church they are no longer married; there never was a marriage. What happens within the Church is a matter between the people concerned and the Church. They are not free to marry again civilly, unless they obtain an annulment in the civil courts.
Most people understand that Church law is State law. Arising from that, if an annulment by the Church is allowed, they are then free to marry again and are married with the blessing of the Church. Complications can set in when a person dies who has had no children by the first marriage but had children by the second marriage because under the 1966 Succession Act his first wife, with whom he never lived, would be entitled to two-thirds of his estate.
There would be very few people who would be so misled as to think that if they obtained a Church annulment they were free to marry again. They would know the consequences of their actions. It would be a bigamous marriage under the civil law if they were to marry again.
In view of the fact that the number of annulments is rising—I understand that there has been a drastic increase in annulments this year—does the Minister see any need to legislate in this regard?
As I indicated in my reply, I am aware that there has been an increase in the number of annulments granted by the religious tribunal of the Roman Catholic Church. I then said that the civil law relating to nullity is being reviewed.
The Minister no doubt is aware that even with annulment by the Catholic Church if the people concerned marry again they are marrying bigamously in the eyes of the State. I read some time ago that the Minister for Health said the Government intend to recognise annulment of marriage by the Catholic Church.
The Government could not be put in the position of having to recognise annulment granted by a specific Church. The Government is the Government for all the people, of all religions. The question of annulment raises serious matters of concern to a growing number of citizens, as Deputy Davern indicated. Because of the growing size of the problem, it is being examined by the Government with a view to seeing if the plight of these people can be eased.
In view of the fact that the Church marriage is regarded by the State as a contract of marriage, and in the light of an annulment of that contract by the Church authorities because the contract did not have the necessary ingredients to maintain it, will the Minister comment on the view that the contract is no longer even a civil contract?
The people adjudicating on that contract would be the Church authorities, not the State. In the eyes of the Church authorities there never was a valid contract and to that extent, in the view of the Church an annulment is granted. It does not necessarily follow that the State will take the same view, nor does it follow from what the Deputy says that because the Church is the registrar for the State in these cases, the State should apply Church law.
Would the Minister accept that the grounds for State nullity are much more stringent than those which apply in the Canon Law? Can the Minister indicate if this review body which is being set up will consider extending the grounds under which civil nullity can be granted, to have it coincide with the Canon Law grounds of nullity?
It is quite clear that the grounds of nullity under the civil law will have to be looked at. A review without looking at those grounds and considering their aptness or otherwise, whether they should be narrowed or widened, would be pointless. The Deputy can take it that they will have to be looked at and examined. I am not saying the examination will lead to the conclusion that they should be on all fours with the grounds as found by the Church, because we live in a pluralist society.
I accept that this examination will have to be conducted in its own right without having regard to the canons of any church. Will the Minister indicate how this review is being carried out and how representative is the committee?
It is being done departmentally and there is access to any information or expert advice required to discharge the task fully and completely.
Final supplementaries from Deputy Loughnane and Deputy Davern.
This is a very important matter.
Yes, and the Chair has given Deputies a lot of latitude. We shall have to pass on to the next question.
Will the Minister in his departmental review take into account the new grounds which the Church is using for annulment not just merely on consummation grounds but on mental, maturity, and other grounds the Church is using now? Would the Minister consider this as urgent legislation?
I am not aware of the specific grounds which the Catholic Church will admit as a basis for annulment. I have no doubt that the body who are looking into this will inform themselves of these grounds and will take them into consideration.
Will the Minister agree that the annulment of marriage by the Catholic Church could be described as the Catholic method of divorce?
I do not agree because there is a distinct and clear difference between annulment and divorce. Annulment finds there never was a marriage; divorce finds there was a marriage and breaks a valid marriage bond.
Pending the review to which the Minister referred, will he state the attitude of the Government towards cases of bigamy?
I would deprecate that bigamous unions would take place. They should be discouraged.