Matthew commented, answering in the negative, to which Epiphany responded after comments by others, with
I responded withNow I am no theologian but if sins committed (in this case a serious lie) before marriage could invalidate the marriage, then who could possibly be validly married?

Your question, Josefa, is referring to dishonesty at the very moment of the vow making, which I can’t answer. That is for a qualified person to decide.

Did you mean Pauline principle or Pauline privilege? I don’t know what the former is.

Oops- Pauline privilege is what I meant!
No ,I don't mean "just" a serious sin but a sin that would show that the person is not totally in full understanding or is deceptive or insincere about their intentions regarding marriage at the time of the nuptials. Cheating with another other than the spouse at the time of the ceremony is a pretty good example of that.

Catholic marries Buddhist in the gondola of a hot air balloon over the Napa Valley with the Dalai Lama officiating

  I hope I get an invite to that reception.  Sounds like the party would be amazing.

Epiphany, you need to study/post excerpts from canon law for this.  If you can't/don't want to, then you should stop giving uneducated advice.  "Oh, this is what I heard" or "Some priest said this" is not a good way to spread Truth.  In fact, you could have misheard or misunderstood what they said.  What you are saying is objectively wrong, for pre-V2 catholicism.

To shed some light on these questions, I decided to look at a book called The Administration of the Sacraments, a work on sacramental theology by a Dominican theologian before Vatican 2. He addresses some of the errors people have espoused in this thread:

This is for Epiphany's statement that any sort of error before marriage invalidates the marriage. Apparently Fr. Halligan teaches the opposite:

An error or mistake of fact will be about the person with whom the marriage contract is made or about a quality of that person. To be in error about the very identity of the person with whom one contracts marriage is substantial and invalidates the contract by the natural law itself, i.e., to judge that one is marrying the very party intended, whereas it is someone else. To be mistaken or in error about some quality of the person with whom marriage is contracted is accidental, e.g., that the person is rich, or healthy, or a virgin, or has a different name, etc., and does not of itself invalidate marriage either by natural law or positive law of the Church, even though the contract is based on it. Notwithstanding error about the accidental qualities, the substance of the contract remains -- consent to contract with the person of the other contracting party.

Here is where he refutes the error that people who don't believe marriage is for life are invalidly married:

An error or mistake of law concerns the nature or essential object and properties of the matrimonial contract, as in the case of ignorance. Thus, a simple error regarding the unity or the indissolubility or the sacramental dignity of marriage, even though the motivating reason for entering into the contract, does not invalidate the matrimonial consent. A simple error is one which remains in the intellect without a positive act following in conformity with it. Thus, as the essence of matrimony has inseparably attached to it is essential properties, in consenting to marriage as it is in itself, consent is thereby also given to its properties of unity and indissolubility. To know a thing with all its properties and to will a thing differ; one can simply will a thing as it is in itself and not know very well its properties or be mistaken about them. Thus an error about the essential qualities of marriage does not necessarily invalidate it. The general intention to contract marriage as instituted by God prevails over the error. Although many consider marriage to be dissoluble and not sacramental, e.g. protestants, Jєωs, infidels, yet they normally will to contract marriage as it is. They probably would positively exclude these properties if they were later questioned about them, but they did not actually exclude them at the time the consent was given.

So even if someone would not have gotten married if he had known it was for life, according to the last sentence, that still does not invalidate his consent.

Here is what he says about simulating consent, one of the favorite errors of the Novus Ordo sect:

The internal consent of the mind is always presumed to be in conformity with the words or signs used in the contracting of marriage. Simulated or feigned consent is present in marriage when, although exteriorly, the words expressing matrimonial consent are duly and seriously pronounced, one or both parties withhold internal consent .The intention of the pretender may be not to contract marriage, or to contract it but not to assume its obligation, or not to fulfill its obligation. An intention not to contract marriage excludes consent and nullifies the contract. Likewise, the intention not to assume the obligation of marriage, since without it there cannot be true matrimonial consent. The intention not to fulfill the matrimonial obligation does not invalidate consent, as this does not pertain to the essence of the contract. The intention to violate an obligation can exist with the intention to assume the obligation itself.

The second part I underlined refutes the error that someone who commits adultery was not validly married. Yes, they are, even if they didn't intend to fulfill their marital obligations.

Grounds for Marriage Annulment in the Catholic Church
There are very well defined canonical grounds for Marriage Annulment. Once these
have been established marriage Annulment can proceed. It is important to
understand the grounds for Marriage Annulment before making application, and if in
doubt you should consult your local priest.

Insufficient use of reason (Canon 1095, 10)
You or your spouse did not know what was happening during the marriage
ceremony because of insanity, mental illness, or a lack of consciousness.

This may only apply to 0.0000001% of population.  Extremely rare.

Grave lack of discretionary judgment concerning essential matrimonial rights and
duties (Canon 1095, 20)

That's why pre-marriage classes exist.  You can't claim "I didn't know" after the classes.

You or your spouse was affected by some serious circuмstances or factors that
made you unable to judge or evaluate either the decision to marry or the ability to
create a true marital relationship.

Again, marriage classes close this loophole.

Psychic-natured incapacity to assume marital obligations (Canon 1095, 30)


You or your spouse, at the time of consent, was unable to fulfill the obligations of
marriage because of a serious psychological disorder or other condition.

Very, very few people are certifiably insane, which would make a marriage vow null and void.  Would only apply to 0.000001% of people.

Ignorance about the nature of marriage (Canon 1096, sec. 1)

Marriage classes explain all things about marriage.  One cannot claim ignorance after these classes.

You or your spouse did not know that marriage is a permanent relationship between
a man and a woman ordered toward the procreation of offspring by means of some
sɛҳuąƖ cooperation.

Marriage classes.

Error of person (Canon 1097, sec. 1) Reasons for Marriage Annulment
You or your spouse intended to marry a specific individual who was not the
individual with whom marriage was celebrated. (For example, mail order brides;
otherwise, this rarely occurs in the United States.)

Proper marriage classes would cover this rare situation.  People have to prove identity and provide baptismal records, etc.  Identity theft could still happen, but rare.

Error about a quality of a person (Canon 1097, sec. 2)
You or your spouse intended to marry someone who either possessed or did not
possess a certain quality, e.g., social status, marital status, education, religious
conviction, freedom from disease, or arrest record. That quality must have been
directly and principally intended.

Ridiculous V2 garbage.  "For better or for worse" covers this situation.

Fraud (Canon 1098) Reasons for Marriage Annulment
You or your spouse was intentionally deceived about the presence or absence of a
quality in the other. The reason for this deception was to obtain consent to marriage.
Total willful exclusion of marriage (Canon 1101, sec. 2)

More V2 garbage.  If the person you marry lied about "being ABLE to marry" (i.e. they were already married but said they weren't) this would be a main reason that lying could invalidate.  Or...that the person was impotent/sterile and knew so, but lied and said they were healthy.  Outside of these 2 reasons, any other "quality" is irrelevant.

You or your spouse did not intend to contract marriage as the law of the Catholic
Church understands marriage. Rather, the ceremony was observed solely as a
means of obtaining something other than marriage itself, e.g., to obtain legal status
in the country or to legitimize a child.

If you go through marriage classes and agree to everything, and the priest "passes you" in the class.  And then you go before God in church and promise to fulfill marriage...that's a marriage.  No ifs, ands or buts.

Willful exclusion of children (Canon 1101, sec. 2)
You or your spouse married intending, either explicitly or implicitly, to deny the
other's right to sɛҳuąƖ acts open to procreation.
Willful exclusion of marital fidelity (Canon 1101, 12)
You or your spouse married intending, either explicitly or implicitly, not to remain
faithful.
Willful exclusion of marital permanence (Canon 1101, sec. 2)
You or your spouse married intending, either explicitly or implicitly, not to create a
permanent relationship, retaining an option to divorce.

Marriage classes.  If you pass the course, you are publicly agreeing to the Church's rules and denying all of the above.  

Future condition (Canon 1102, sec. 2)
You or your spouse attached a future condition to your decision to marry, e.g., you
will complete your education, your income will be at a certain level, you will remain in
this area.

Past condition (Canon 1102, sec. 2)R
You or your spouse attached a past condition so your decision to marry and that
condition did not exist; e.g., I will marry you provided that you have never been
married before, I will marry you provided that you have graduated from college.
Present condition (Canon 1102, sec. 2)

You or your spouse attached a present condition to your decision to marry and that
condition did not exist, e.g., I will marry you provided you don't have any debt.
Force (Canon 1103)

Again, marriage classes make these excuses impossible.

You or your spouse married because of an external physical or moral force that you
could not resist.
Fear (1103)
You or your spouse chose to marry because of fear that was grave and inescapable
and was caused by an outside source.

Marriage classes, again.  Also, even if one of the spouses were forced to marry because of a death threat or something...this would be extremely rare.

Error regarding marital unity that determined the will (1099)
You or your spouse married believing that marriage was not necessarily an
exclusive relationship.
Error regarding marital indissolubility that determined the will (Canon 1099)
You or your spouse married believing that civil law had the power to dissolve
marriage and that remarriage was acceptable after civil divorce.
Error regarding marital sacramental dignity that determined the will (Canon 1099)
You and your spouse married believing that marriage is not a religious or sacred
relationship but merely a civil contract or arrangement.

Can't claim any of these "errors" if you go through marriage classes.

Lack of new consent during convalidation (Canons 1157,1160)
After your civil marriage, you and your spouse participated in a Catholic ceremony
and you or your spouse believed that (1) you were already married, (2) the Catholic
ceremony was merely a blessing, and (3) the consent given during. the Catholic
ceremony had no real effect

marriage. classes. fixes. this. problem.

Grounds for Marriage Annulment in the Catholic Church
There are very well defined canonical grounds for Marriage Annulment. Once these
have been established marriage Annulment can proceed. It is important to
understand the grounds for Marriage Annulment before making application, and if in
doubt you should consult your local priest.
Insufficient use of reason (Canon 1095, 10)
You or your spouse did not know what was happening during the marriage
ceremony because of insanity, mental illness, or a lack of consciousness.
Grave lack of discretionary judgment concerning essential matrimonial rights and
duties (Canon 1095, 20)
You or your spouse was affected by some serious circuмstances or factors that
made you unable to judge or evaluate either the decision to marry or the ability to
create a true marital relationship.
Psychic-natured incapacity to assume marital obligations (Canon 1095, 30)
You or your spouse, at the time of consent, was unable to fulfill the obligations of
marriage because of a serious psychological disorder or other condition.
Ignorance about the nature of marriage (Canon 1096, sec. 1)
You or your spouse did not know that marriage is a permanent relationship between
a man and a woman ordered toward the procreation of offspring by means of some
sɛҳuąƖ cooperation.
Error of person (Canon 1097, sec. 1) Reasons for Marriage Annulment
You or your spouse intended to marry a specific individual who was not the
individual with whom marriage was celebrated. (For example, mail order brides;
otherwise, this rarely occurs in the United States.)
Error about a quality of a person (Canon 1097, sec. 2)
You or your spouse intended to marry someone who either possessed or did not
possess a certain quality, e.g., social status, marital status, education, religious
conviction, freedom from disease, or arrest record. That quality must have been
directly and principally intended.
Fraud (Canon 1098) Reasons for Marriage Annulment
You or your spouse was intentionally deceived about the presence or absence of a
quality in the other. The reason for this deception was to obtain consent to marriage.
Total willful exclusion of marriage (Canon 1101, sec. 2)
You or your spouse did not intend to contract marriage as the law of the Catholic
Church understands marriage. Rather, the ceremony was observed solely as a
means of obtaining something other than marriage itself, e.g., to obtain legal status
in the country or to legitimize a child.

Willful exclusion of children (Canon 1101, sec. 2)
You or your spouse married intending, either explicitly or implicitly, to deny the
other's right to sɛҳuąƖ acts open to procreation.
Willful exclusion of marital fidelity (Canon 1101, 12)
You or your spouse married intending, either explicitly or implicitly, not to remain
faithful.
Willful exclusion of marital permanence (Canon 1101, sec. 2)
You or your spouse married intending, either explicitly or implicitly, not to create a
permanent relationship, retaining an option to divorce.
Future condition (Canon 1102, sec. 2)
You or your spouse attached a future condition to your decision to marry, e.g., you
will complete your education, your income will be at a certain level, you will remain in
this area.
Past condition (Canon 1102, sec. 2)R
You or your spouse attached a past condition so your decision to marry and that
condition did not exist; e.g., I will marry you provided that you have never been
married before, I will marry you provided that you have graduated from college.
Present condition (Canon 1102, sec. 2)
You or your spouse attached a present condition to your decision to marry and that
condition did not exist, e.g., I will marry you provided you don't have any debt.
Force (Canon 1103)
You or your spouse married because of an external physical or moral force that you
could not resist.
Fear (1103)
You or your spouse chose to marry because of fear that was grave and inescapable
and was caused by an outside source.
Error regarding marital unity that determined the will (1099)
You or your spouse married believing that marriage was not necessarily an
exclusive relationship.
Error regarding marital indissolubility that determined the will (Canon 1099)
You or your spouse married believing that civil law had the power to dissolve
marriage and that remarriage was acceptable after civil divorce.
Error regarding marital sacramental dignity that determined the will (Canon 1099)
You and your spouse married believing that marriage is not a religious or sacred
relationship but merely a civil contract or arrangement.
Lack of new consent during convalidation (Canons 1157,1160)
After your civil marriage, you and your spouse participated in a Catholic ceremony
and you or your spouse believed that (1) you were already married, (2) the Catholic
ceremony was merely a blessing, and (3) the consent given during. the Catholic
ceremony had no real effect


Like I said in the OP, I don't think I agree with NO annulments, but here are the grounds with the Canons.

Thank you for posting this.  

Grounds for Marriage Annulment in the Catholic Church
There are very well defined canonical grounds for Marriage Annulment. Once these
have been established marriage Annulment can proceed. It is important to
understand the grounds for Marriage Annulment before making application, and if in
doubt you should consult your local priest.

This may only apply to 0.0000001% of population.  Extremely rare.

That's why pre-marriage classes exist.  You can't claim "I didn't know" after the classes.

Again, marriage classes close this loophole.


Very, very few people are certifiably insane, which would make a marriage vow null and void.  Would only apply to 0.000001% of people.


Marriage classes explain all things about marriage.  One cannot claim ignorance after these classes.

Marriage classes.


Proper marriage classes would cover this rare situation.  People have to prove identity and provide baptismal records, etc.  Identity theft could still happen, but rare.

Ridiculous V2 garbage.  "For better or for worse" covers this situation.


More V2 garbage.  If the person you marry lied about "being ABLE to marry" (i.e. they were already married but said they weren't) this would be a main reason that lying could invalidate.  Or...that the person was impotent/sterile and knew so, but lied and said they were healthy.  Outside of these 2 reasons, any other "quality" is irrelevant.


If you go through marriage classes and agree to everything, and the priest "passes you" in the class.  And then you go before God in church and promise to fulfill marriage...that's a marriage.  No ifs, ands or buts.


Marriage classes.  If you pass the course, you are publicly agreeing to the Church's rules and denying all of the above. 


Again, marriage classes make these excuses impossible.

Marriage classes, again.  Also, even if one of the spouses were forced to marry because of a death threat or something...this would be extremely rare.


Can't claim any of these "errors" if you go through marriage classes.

marriage. classes. fixes. this. problem.

Pax, marriage classes don't prevent deceit.

Pax, marriage classes don't prevent deceit.

... and deceit doesn't invalidate a marriage. Did you read what I quoted from that pre-Vatican 2 theologian?