(PNA photo | Jess Escaros Jr.)

(excerpted from GMA News) The proposal of the women’s party list group 1-Ako Babaeng Astig Aasenso (1-ABAA) to place expiration dates on marriage contracts raised a ruckus. The controversial proposition was brought to light at the Daungan ng Balita news forum held at the Danarra Hotel in Quezon City last Thursday, January 7, 2009.

1-ABAA, which represents separated and abandoned women, proposed the enactment of a law that would mandate a 10-year limit on the validity of a marriage contract. Its purpose is “to spare incompatible couples the expense of lengthy legal proceedings before their marriages are annulled.”

After all, the marriage license, which the couple obtains before they can get married, has a “built-in” expiration date. Article 20 of the Family Code of the Philippines stipulates that a marriage license is only valid “for a period of one hundred twenty days from the date of issue” and is deemed automatically canceled if the contracting parties have not made use of it by the end of the mandated period.
As 1-ABAA president Margie Tajon put it, “[A marriage contract] should be just like a passport or driver’s license. If we are not interested to renew it, then it expires.” This, of course, seems like a pragmatic solution to toxic unions. These days, as Tajon pointed out, “Those who can’t afford an annulment just suffer forever.”

Bottom line: 1-ABAA wants to amend the Family Code so that marriage will no longer be treated as a special contract. To date, the marriage contract, is defined by the Family Code as “a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life.”

When it comes to the legal definition of marriage in the Philippines, you have to pay attention to two crucial words: “special” and “permanent.” It is “special” because, unlike in other types of contracts, the parties involved cannot stipulate on whatever pleases them. The word, “permanent,” is self-explanatory. As such, a Pinoy marriage is pretty much built to last—at least in legal terms.

It goes without saying that the Catholic Church would be at the forefront of parties opposing the 1-ABAA proposal. “Bago naming napag-isipan yan, alam na naming na Church ang number one [na mag-po-protesta],” stated Tajon.

Though the Philippine Constitution mandates the separation of Church and State, the Church’s pronouncements still hold sway over many Filipinos. The 1-ABAA proposal, by the way, would not affect Muslim marriages, since they’re already allowed to divorce and governed by the stipulations of the Islamic religion. [READ MORE…]

- - - - - - - - - -
related articles:

• License to Love (The Marocharim Experiment | opinion)
• Women’s group wants expiry date on marriage (Phil. Star)
• Partylist 1-ABAA favors annulment of marriage over divorce system (Balita.ph)
  

(via CBCP news) MANILA —A church leader doesn’t equate homosexuality with immorality, but opposes redefining marriage that would include same sex unions.

According to Father Melvin Castro, opposing with gay-rights groups on same-sex marriage does not qualify as hate position and doesn’t mean the church is anti-gay.

Castro, executive secretary of the CBCP’s Commission on Family and Life, said the church is only trying to defend marriage as an exclusive union between a man and a woman.

“Same-sex marriage contradicts the clear teaching of the Catholic Church on marriage and sexuality,” he said.

Castro said same-sex unions go against the basic purpose of marriage, to produce children. Giving them the same legal status as married couples, he added, violates divine law.

On the other hand, he also expressed concern that same-sex union is already legal in other countries.

The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and South Africa are the only countries in which the legal status of same-sex union is exactly the same as that of opposite-sex marriages.

In the Philippines, some homosexual organizations are also calling for the legalization of same-sex union.

But the church leader said that no matter how proponents of same-sex union would put it, it would still upset humanity and society. (Roy Lagarde)

- - - - - - - - - -

related news article:

• Church official opposes gay marriage (Balita.ph)

[via CBCP News] The head of Manila’s Roman Catholic Church has banned wedding rites from being held outside the churches.

Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales said that for a couple to get married outside a parish church was contrary to the meaning of Christian marriage.

“All Catholic marriages within the Archdiocese of Manila should be held within the parish churches,” Rosales said in a circular issued to his clergy recently.

Rosales said he was acting to prevent the sacrament of marriage being ridiculed and to press the observance of “all ecclesiastical laws.”

“I have to ensure that abuses do not creep into ecclesiastical discipline, especially concerning the celebration of the sacrament of marriage,” he said.

But the cardinal took exception for those “in periculo mortis” cases.

The religious term is a marriage that is performed when either the groom or bride is in danger of death.

Canon law does require that weddings take place within a church building but each bishop may particularize the policy in his diocese.

Hence, like in Manila, there are other dioceses that do not allow outdoor weddings without a dispensation from the bishop.

Rosales is known for his moves to ensure the solemnity of the sacrament of matrimony within his pastoral jurisdiction.

The church official earlier called the attention of soon-to-wed couples not to forget the solemnity of their marriage ceremony.

He noted that couples focus too much their attention on the wedding details like invitations, attires, among other things, and their attention towards the solemnity of the ceremony is diminished.

Rosales also stated that more couples are now opting to have a civil wedding rather than a church wedding because of the increasing cost involved in holding the latter.

He likewise appealed to bridal parties to wear proper attire during wedding ceremonies. Certain clothing can distract fellow churchgoers from prayer, he said.

(via Manila Times) Things do go wrong. People do make mistakes, despite vows made before God and man. To come to the realization that a marriage is a failure is bitter pill to swallow. But there are circumstances far worse than separation.

For decades, the unattainable myth of the ideal Filipino family—long kept artificially intact by Church, family and society through guilt and shame—led unhappy spouses to endure abuses, lies and loveless lives for the rest of their days. A marriage that is dead is still so regardless of whether society chooses to recognize the fact or not.

But even in the 21st century when truth is valued over appearances, the price of freedom is still steep. Nonetheless, annulment is a necessary process a couple needs to undergo, whether they like it or not, for them to be free.

Atty. Honorata Victoria defines annulment simply as “the process where the marriage tie of the couple will be severed, hence, capacitating the parties to contract another marriage.”

Citing the Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order 209), Victoria also differentiates annulment (Articles 45 and 53) and declaration for absolute nullity of marriage (Articles 35, 36, 37 and 38). She explains that annulment only presupposes a marriage valid until annulled, whilst if a marriage is declared null, the marriage is void ab initio (void from the very start).

Civil and Church courts

Recourses for annulment vary, depending on whether a couple had a civil or a Catholic Church wedding.

Pointedly, the Church refuses to accept the word annulment. The Church only declares marriage nullity, concluding that there has been no true marriage from the very beginning.

Reverend Salvador Yun, the parish priest of the Archdiocesan Shrine of Santa Ana, reiterates the finality of marriage vows: “Till death do them part.” However, Rev. Yun concedes that human errors are made. That is why the Church made laws in order to correct something that should have never been done, he explains.

Grounds of annulment

Victoria notes that, for both Civil and Church courts, “The usual and most abused ground for the petition for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage is article 36 of the family code—psychological incapacity.”

She also noted that long before the State accepted psychological incapacity as legitimate grounds for annulment, the Church’s Canon Law had already recognized it. The Church defines psychological incapacity as a ground in which there is a lack of understanding to the idea of marriage, its obligations and rights.

Other grounds that are both present in Civil and Church are lack of legal capacity on the part of the contracting parties (under-aged partners), marriages solemnized without license, mistaken identities, mistaken sexualities, multiple marriages, etc.

The process

For the those married in a civil wedding, the first thing to do is to visit a lawyer and check if certain grounds are present in order to file a petition.

For those married in Church, the first thing to do is to visit a canon lawyer. According to Rev. Yun, if a couple seeks their help, they first try to make the couple realize and accept their mistakes and then attempt to reconcile them.

For civil courts, the petitioner will file his case to the Regional Trial Court of his residence and accomplish a copy of the petition to the Office of the Solicitor General. If this takes place accordingly and all other requisites are completed, a series of trials will take place until the court reaches the judgment that the marriage be declared null and void ab initio.

Since there are limited Church Tribunals in the country, the domicile or residence of not only the petitioner but also the respondent are taken into consideration.

Writing up the whole process only needs some three paragraphs. Yet in reality, annulment takes from one to two years. “If there will be no fight on the property and custody of the minor children, at the average it would take 12 to 24 months from the time of filing,” says Atty. Victoria.

Bro. Jeoffrey Brian Catuiran, Notary to the Tribunal of First Instance in Pasig, emphasizes that a Church tribunal hearing usually take more time if there are few evidences and witnesses that are gathered in order to establish a strong ground on the nullity of marriage.

Applying to the Church courts for marriage nullity, one’s petition is by no means assured. Even celebrities and politicians have been denied a second chance at happiness. As for civil marriages, Atty. Victoria notes, “If there exists ground, the courts usually grant the petition.”

The cost of freedom

Though a civil annulment is faster, it is more expensive than a Church annulment. “[A civil annulment is] very costly. A professional lawyer would range form P50,000 to P100,000 and even more. Then, if the ground is psychological incapacity, the petitioner shall be paying the psychiatrist or psychologist P25,000. Then, the filing fee, it depends on the value of the absolute community of property or conjugal partnership of gains. At the average the petitioner needs at least P100,000,” says Atty. Victoria.

The average cost of a Church annulment is only P60,000. Nevertheless, living in truth and setting one another free is priceless. There is only the rest of one’s life left to live.

(photo courtesy of The Second Chronicles Gospel Singers)

(via inquirer.net) The city council of Pasay approved a resolution on Friday requesting the National Historical Institute (NHI) to place a marker at the a small church where the late president Corazon ‘Cory’ Aquino and martyred senator Benigno ‘Ninoy’ Aquino were married.

Councilor Noel Bayona, the proponent of the resolution, told the Philippine Daily Inquirer by phone that the place where the couple exchanged their vows was unknown to many.

Cory and Ninoy were married at Our Lady of Sorrows Church on F.B. Harrison Street, Pasay City, on October 11, 1954.

The resolution said that by placing a historical marker where the Aquinos celebrated important events in their lives, particularly the place where they were married, “their lives are forever remembered by the country.”

“During the dark days of martial rule in the country, the late senator Aquino had carried on the crusade of fighting the dictatorship and the restoration of the democracy which eventually led to his assassination at the international airport,” the resolution said.

The resolution added that the senator did not die in vain as his advocacies were continued by his wife.

On Monday, the city council will send the request and a copy of the resolution to the NHI headquarters.