[Mrs. Don-o]

I just wanted to add that according to an article from today's AP by Jay Lindsay, Ted Kennedy "was granted an annulment only after he admitted he wasn't being honest when he promised her he'd be faithful."

So the Church ruled that Ted Kennedy was guilty of fraud and deception in the taking of marriage vows, then the vows were defective, and consequently, fell short of being sacramental.

A legal or civil "marriage" existed, but not a sacramental one, because a sacramental one must be based on true consent.

By way of analogy, it's the same as if you lied and only pretended to be baptized, or practiced fraud or forgery in the signing of a contract. Such a "baptism" or such a contract would be null and void.

In this case, the Church said "Ted, you never intended fidelity from the git-go, your marriage vows were a sham." I must say, the Church was right about that.

[goat granny]

I thank you for your answer, it does in fact clear up a few things for me about his annulment. Not being a democrat and no fan of the Kennedy’s, I didn’t follow it very close. Just thought at the time, money buys lots of things, but in fact it seems the church called him on his lies. Thanks