Chapter III. Dissolution of Betrothal

Betrothal, like other contracts, can be dissolved in various ways. The parties may both agree to release each other and then they will be free, for by a rule of law all things are dissolved by the same causes which gave them birth. If children under age have been betrothed, they cannot release the contract even by mutual consent until the age of puberty, and then within three days either may resile from the contract without waiting for the consent of the other party; but if they do not use this privilege granted by canon law they are presumed to ratify the contract.

One of the betrothed may resile if a circumstance of importance be detected or happen which if it had been known before would have prevented the contract being entered into, This rule is commonly admitted by divines, who explain it by saying that betrothal is of its nature conditional, and has such a condition as the above annexed to it. If, then, one of the parties finds that the other has an ungovernable temper, or great debts, or is given to drink, or if the other becomes afflicted with a disease like consumption or paralysis, he will be free to rescind the contract. The innocent party may resile if the other commit fornication with someone else, and certainly the man is free if he find out that the woman was corrupted even . before betrothal. The same rule may be applied in favour of the woman when she finds out that the man committed fornication before betrothal, at least if in the particular case it is a sign of inconstancy or is very much resented.

Betrothal is annulled if an impediment of marriage come to exist between the parties unless it had its origin in the culpable fraud of one of them, for then he must do what he can to obtain a dispensation or at least compensate the other, as no one should reap advantage from his own fraud.

One who is betrothed may resile in order to enter a religious order, or to take sacred orders, or even with a view of living in the world under a perpetual vow of chastity, for in all these cases a higher life is embraced, and betrothal has also the condition annexed, “ Unless afterward I am called to a higher life.”

The Pope may for a just cause grant a dispensation from betrothal. Some authors maintained that the Pope had not the power to grant such a dispensation, inasmuch as it would violate the rights of the other party. However, if an individual is unreasonably obstinate in the maintenance of his rights, the head of the society to which he belongs should have the power of granting relief to others whom that obstinacy places in difficulties. This is what the Pope sometimes does; when a civil marriage contracted in violation of betrothal to another, though null and void in the eyes of the Church, makes it impossible for the married party to return to his former betrothed, the Pope will grant a dispensation even if the other party refuses to forego his rights.

When one of the parties labours under a secret defect which, if known, would furnish sufficient ground for resiling from the engagement, there is no strict obligation to make . it known to the other party, unless it will be to his detriment. Past sin, then, need not be declared, but if the woman has undergone an operation which makes her incapable of bearing children, she should not contract marriage with a man who is ignorant of the defect and hopes to have children.

Whether marriage with a woman contracted in violation of a promise of marriage made to another annuls the former betrothal altogether, or whether the obligation to marry the first is only suspended and revives again if the wife die before the husband, is a disputed question among divines. Of course, such a breach of faith makes the other party free to marry someone else if she choose, and the opinion is at least probable that by such a radical change in circumstances as marriage with another the former engagement is altogether dissolved and cannot revive. There is something incongruous in the idea of a person who is married to one, being nevertheless still under the obligation to marry someone else.

If a man after betrothal without the knowledge or consent of his betrothed goes to live elsewhere at a distance so that personal intercourse between them is impossible, the woman may consider herself free to break off the engagement. A short absence makes no difference in the mutual obligations of the parties. If it is uncertain with what intention and for how long a time a betrothed person has absented himself, information as to his intentions should be sought by letter before breaking off the engagement. If a time was fixed for the marriage, the obligation is not extinguished by failure to keep to the time, unless it is certain that the intention of the parties was to break off the engagement if the marriage were not contracted at the appointed time. Presents made to the betrothed in view of marriage are forfeited if the engagement is broken off through the fault of him who made the presents, otherwise, if the fault is on the other side.

If it is certain that there is good cause for breaking off an engagement, this may be done by private authority; it will only be necessary to have recourse to the ecclesiastical judge when the cause is doubtful, or when scandal would arise if the engagement were broken off by private authority on account of the cause being unknown.

When valid betrothal has been broken off by one of the parties without good reason, the other has no right of action in the ecclesiastical court to compel the defaulting party to fulfil the contract, he has only a right to an action for damages (Can. 1017, sec. 3). This action is mixti fori (A.A.S., xx, 345).

People who are only engaged to be married have not the rights of married people, and if they attempt to use them they are guilty of sin against the sixth commandment. It is, however, as a rule, morally necessary for them to become acquainted with each other, and they are justified in showing to each other those marks of affection which are not wrong in themselves and which are usual in the circumstances, It is to be desired that they should not be much together alone, especially at night, and if they are left alone they should not show greater familiarity toward each other than they do when a mother or sister is with them.