[RnMomof7]

The reason for this allowance under the 1983 Code of Canon Law was to attempt to support the institution of marriage, even for Catholics who had renounced the Faith, Flynn said. Catholics who defect from the faith, or formally renounce it, must do so by writing a letter to their bishop stating their defection.
The only consequence of a defection prior to “Omnium in Mentem” was that the defector would subsequently be able to “get married validly without observing canonical form,” noted Flynn. This would mean that a defecting Catholic could validly be married in a civil ceremony, for example, without a dispensation.

This is incredible.. the church wants former Catholics to follow canon law regarding remarriage in a CIVIL ceremony... They say that former catholics are subject to canon law because they were baptized as an infant without their consent ??

Ohh please give me a break.. does the church need the money it makes doing annulments or something??

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

It speaks to the role Marriage plays within Natural Law. Just as the Church recognizes any baptism given in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; the Church also claims a role over Marriage. As a result, the Church will speak to the validity or invalidity of ANY marriage. For example, if a Catholic leaves the Church, divorces, and then remarries in another denomination or sect, the Church states the marriage is invalid due to the divorced status of the individual.

[Mad Dawg]

No. If they later on UN-defected, then they would have to regularize their marriage. Otherwise, what do they care that the church thinks their marriage is invalid?

[Campion]

This is incredible.. the church wants former Catholics to follow canon law regarding remarriage in a CIVIL ceremony

Remarriage? Civil ceremony?

Catholics are required to "obey the Catholic form" in marriage for validity ("Catholic form" == a Catholic rite witnessed by a Catholic cleric), or get a "dispensation of form" from the bishop. The law previously exempted persons who had left the church from that requirement; now, it doesn't.

Ohh please give me a break.. does the church need the money it makes doing annulments or something??

If they do, they just made a big mistake.

You see, going forward, this means that a person who leaves the church, contracts marriage outside the church, then divorces, then wants to remarry to a Catholic, can get an annulment on the basis of "invalid form".

Which, compared to a normal annulment, is trivial, fast, and (I would expect) cheaper. (Faster I know for a fact.)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

does the church need the money it makes doing annulments or something??

LOL. Well, it doesn't need the money, but it's always nice to pad the coffers.

Funny how the papacy presumes it controls people's lives even after they've fled the interview, by the grace of God.

[the_conscience]

I don’t really know what to say to that except it’s pathetic.

I suppose it’s a way to pull the naive back into their cult.

[SuziQ]

They say that former catholics are subject to canon law because they were baptized as an infant without their consent ??

Most Catholics received several more Sacraments along the way, after their Baptisms, and the others were as older children or young adults, when they knew what was going on. The Church has always taught that civil marriages are invalid, because they are not Sacramental. I don't see anything new in this statement.

And, as I'm sure you probably well know, the Church doesn't do annulments for the money. Any fee charged for an annulment is for the administrative costs of the process.