The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royal Families of France (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f76/)
-   -   Annulment for the Count of Paris and the Duchess of Montpensier (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f76/annulment-for-the-count-of-paris-and-the-duchess-of-montpensier-20763.html)

V.F.H.78 03-16-2009 07:51 AM

Annulment for the Count of Paris and the Duchess of Montpensier
 
Future religious wedding for Henri, Count of Paris, and his second wife Michaela Cousino Quinones de Leon?
It is now possible because Prince Henri obtained the cancellation by Rome of his union with Duchess Marie Thérèse of Wurtemberg and because Micaela's first husband is dead.
Prochain mariage religieux pour les comtes de Paris ? | Noblesse & Royautés

Warren 03-16-2009 09:10 AM

If the report is correct, the Vatican has annulled the first marriage of the comte de Paris and Marie Thérèse of Württemberg. Although married for about 27 years and five children the Church has now ruled that the marriage never existed. Hmm :confused:

Odette 03-16-2009 09:24 AM

:previous:With his son getting married in a couple of months this was so (JIMHO) so uneccessary. The Duchess will go to her son's wedding from a marriage that never existed?

Marengo 03-24-2009 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Odette (Post 908475)
:previous:With his son getting married in a couple of months this was so (JIMHO) so uneccessary. The Duchess will go to her son's wedding from a marriage that never existed?

According to the information I read on 'noblesseetroyautees' they already obtained the annullment in the autumn of 2008. It doesn't seem clear on what grounds though, members are speculating that perhaps the count of Paris can claim that they were forced into the marriage by his father. Some othe rinteresting information from the discussion: a member says that Charles de Gaulle was involved with the match too, as could 'use' it to improve French-German relations and because he made hints to the count of Paris about an eventual restauration of the French monarchy.

Fortunately enough the Vatican does not think that the children of annuled marriages are bastards, which technically would be the case if the parents were not married. Lots of 'Quelle hypocrisie' comments on the French board btw, quite understandably.

Marengo 03-26-2009 07:41 AM

The official announcement of the annulment by the website of the count of Paris, in French (obviously).

http://www.gotha.fr/Documents/comte%20de%20Paris.jpg

It also says that the count and countess of Paris intend to marry religiously in September of this year.

rominet09 03-26-2009 10:22 AM

I feel awfully sorry for the Duchess of Montpensier....such a brave Lady, finding herself alone with five children, two of them heavily handicapped !

NotAPretender 03-26-2009 10:26 AM

I realize that we aren't supposed to discuss religious matters on this board, but the issue of annulment seems to transcend this.

Annulment essentially says that at the moment of the marriage, there was an obstacle that prevented the free giving of consent to the marriage. Coercion is definitely an obstacle, and grounds for an annulment.

Children of a marriage that was entered into in good faith are not considered to be "bastards" or illegitimate.

It is rare that the Vatican directly grants an annulment. It is usually the purview of the Diocese or Archdiocese in which the petitioning member resides. However, in matters involving Catholic monarchs or royalty (such as Caroline of Monaco,) the Vatican may assume jurisdiction.

There is a Canonical court which "tries" the marriage; the presumption going into trial is that the marriage is fully valid. In fact, two of the three "triers" are proponents of the validity of the marriage.

It's neither an easy process nor a quick one. Although often referred to in sneering tones, it is taken very seriously and not lightly.

I actually wish that the making of a marriage was taken as seriously as the unmaking.

Al_bina 03-26-2009 10:37 AM

I find the whole situation really really sad for Duchess of Montpensier and her children. I fail to understand the reasoning behind Count's of Paris actions. Why to seek the annulment of his first marriage, thereby making the situation both embarrassing and awkward for his children and their mother? Why to spit at the face of his family?
By the way, who is going to inherent the title "Count of Paris"?

NotAPretender 03-26-2009 11:26 AM

I also don't understand the need to do this as this stage of the game. He and the Duchess of Montpensier have been civilly divorced since 1984, and the count and his current wife have no children. On its face, it seems churlish. Then again, if it arises from a genuine desire to be reconciled with their faith and begin receiving the Sacraments again, this would be a necessary step. At this time, as they are not married in the Catholic faith, they are considered by the Church to be living in a state of mortal sin; they can attend Mass but cannot receive any Sacraments. Perhaps it is that they wish to rectify this and be reconciled to the Church by marrying religiously as well as civilly. I hope that's the motivation.

Al-bina, I believe that the Count's eldest son (Count of Claremont) who is disabled, will inherit the title of Count of Paris, with the second son set to be "regent" to his older brother As the older son (b 1961) has not and presumably will not marry and have issue, it will be the second son, the Duke of Vendôme, who will eventually inherit the title.

Al_bina 03-26-2009 12:00 PM

In my personal opinion ...
 
It does not matter how fair Count's of Paris desire to ease his conscience in terms of religious Sacraments ... it will never compensate a rather unpleasant taste his actions have left.

amedea 03-26-2009 12:22 PM

it would be intresting to know the motivation in law of the anulemente

Sg1fan 03-26-2009 12:43 PM

His motivations are simple. In the eyes of the Catholic Church he can not receive sacraments because he is living in sin by being married outside of the church. This has nothing to do with his children by his first wife (or his first wife).

Annulment simply means that there was some reason the first wedding was not valid (most likely because he was forced into it by his parents). It does not negate his children but simply says he did not make a commitment of his own free will in the eyes of the Church. The children are still his children and heirs, their status does not change.

My guess is that he wants to live his life in the Church, correctly and can not do so unless his civil marriage is recognized by the Church.

This does not leave any bad taste for me because he didn't do anything wrong. If this were a young woman forced into a marriage who was able to get out of the marriage years later would that be such an issue?

amedea 03-26-2009 12:59 PM

what I'm more curious about is exactly this: the reason that make the wedding not valid; so it seems to be because he was forced! thanks Sg

Al_bina 03-26-2009 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sg1fan (Post 913441)
... [snipped] Annulment simply means that there was some reason the first wedding was not valid (most likely because he was forced into it by his parents). It does not negate his children but simply says he did not make a commitment of his own free will in the eyes of the Church. The children are still his children and heirs, their status does not change. ... [snipped]

I would like to know why it is pivotal for Count of Paris to make the first union invalid. Poor thing was coerced ... :rolleyes: Anything else ..? I risk sounding chauvinist, but actions of Count of Paris are revolting. He wiped his feet over 27 years of the marriage and 5 children. This is not surprising ... many men do that ...

MAfan 03-26-2009 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amedea (Post 913443)
what I'm more curious about is exactly this: the reason that make the wedding not valid; so it seems to be because he was forced! thanks Sg

That's really a good question, but I fear that we won't know the answer...Why the annulment after they have been married for 27 years, and had 5 children...

pamk 03-26-2009 01:53 PM

I wish that I could get my hands on the autobiography of Diane of Wurttembourg, the Count's sister. She is married to the Duchess of Monpensier's brother. I believe that she wrote that at her wedding, her brother (the present Count of Paris) kept saying how much in love and how happy he was with his wife - they had only been married for a few years.
Of course, things change over the years, and the Duchess has conducted herself in such a classy way. I, in no way, condone the Count's behavior. If his children even maintain any kind of civil relationship with their wayward father, he is indeed a very lucky man.

NotAPretender 03-26-2009 02:20 PM

Al-bina, I think that Sg1 explained it in better terms than I did. The Count (most likely) wishes to be reconciled into his faith.

The couple were divorced in 1984; they have been divorced and apart for 25 years, nearly as long as they were together. I think this is enough time for everyone to have come to terms and be at peace with this decision.

I do know this much: one does not obtain an annulment in a vacuum. And it doesn't happen quickly; most take years, so it's not as though the timing is really within the control of the petitioner or respondent. Each of the parties, both petitioner and respondent, are represented with their own Canon lawyer at the proceeding, and the presumption is that the marriage is valid. In fact, the marriage itself has its own Canon lawyer to defend it. If one party does not want the marriage to be annulled, it is very, very, very rarely annullled. One such case happened in the US and the wife, who did not want the annullment, appealed it all the way to the Vatican, which overturned the annullment and upheld the marriage. My point is that it is very likely that the Duchess of Monpensier was fully informed, participated in the process, and would have been asked for final consent.

An annullment, if granted, consists of two findings: a finding that the marriage was not valid; and permission or denial of permission to marry in the Church. I can tell you from personal experience that both parties in an annullment may or may not be granted permission to marry in the faith after an annullment. In mine, I was granted the right to marry in the Church. If the authorities find that one party committed grievous sin against the marriage, then that person is generally denied permission to marry after annullment. My point there being, if the findings of the investigation uncovered grievous sin against, say, the Count, he would be denied permission for a marriage. He has not been.

No one other than the full Tribunal sees the documents prepared for the "trial" or hearing. One does not have "right of discovery" as to what the other party has written about the marriage. And the findings of the Tribunal are not published. So we do not know what the grounds are that he (or she! it could have been the Duchess who initiated this!) suggested.

If I saw the Count throwing a big "hey, she's gone!" party, I'd be right there with you. But it seems as though this is a step he has taken after a very long (25 year) consideration. And that the Duchess, by not appealing the decision, seems to be in concurrence.

I hope it brings them the peace that it can.

Al_bina 03-26-2009 02:48 PM

My opinion on the situation is likely to remain categorical.
 
Thanks for explanations! :flowers: Still I find Count's of Paris actions unacceptable. Let him be reconciled into his faith. From I have heard, Duchess is far more dignified than her husband. The wife's concurrence does not make this situation less uglier/unpleasant/bitter for me. Someone needs to preserve face in this situation.

NotAPretender 03-26-2009 03:09 PM

I'm trying to find out a bit more about the Duchess - there really isn't a lot! I think I may have to go dig out some publications from the time of her marriage to see a background.

Zonk 03-26-2009 03:13 PM

Well...I normally don't follow French royalty and I have to tell you. What a mess!
And what was the deal with the Comte's father? Disinheirting everyone?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises