Hoo boy! First the state makes a mockery out of marriage, and now the Church?
>>>Hoo boy! First the state makes a mockery out of marriage, and now the Church?>>>
If the marriage was never consummated there IS no marriage. If, for instance, the man cannot perform his marriage duty, the Church can grant an annulment.
But to keep it’s marriage records up to date, the STATE will insist on a divorce, NOT THE CHURCH.
In this case, the woman has to obey both the State and the Church. Pretty simple.
Not at all. If a Church tribunal came forward with a finding of nullity and the woman were still civilly married, she would be forbidden by God's law to continue cohabitating with the man, since there is no marriage. (That's what "null" and "nullity" mean.)
If they were not civilly divorced, her leaving their shared domicile and refusing marital relations would be considered (by the state) as abandonment on her part, and the Church could be sued for alienation of affections. In other words, the Church would be blamed for breaking up their (civil) marriage and depriving the husband of his relations with his wife.
If this woman is really convinced in her conscience that this attempted marriage is actually null, she should initiate a divorce, since in God's eyes (which is to say, in reality) they are not validly married.
Perhaps a simpler way to put it: why would she NOT want a divorce, if she believes they are not now actually married?