Up to now, a Catholic couple can opt to marry either in church or a civil ceremony.

Church marriages are later registered in the civil courts. This is possible thanks to the concordat signed between the government and the Holy See in the 90s, which gave Catholics the option to choose what kind of marriage they wanted to enter into.

If they choose a Church wedding, that marriage, on court registration, is legal and binding and valid in every way with respect to any benefits and duties associated with marriage.

So a Catholic couple married in church does not enter into a civil marriage but is bound only by a canonical marriage over which the Church alone has jurisdiction but which is also recognised as valid by the state.

If divorce is introduced we will have these scenarios: 1. People who were married civilly only applying for divorce and getting it, provided they satisfy the requirements according to law; 2. People married in church only who might also think they have a right to ask the court to dissolve their marriage.

In this case, since the marriage was contracted in church, it falls under canon law and is limited to canonical jurisdiction, so on what grounds can divorce be awarded to such a couple?

I have asked around and got this answer; they will be awarded a divorce on the civil effects of such a Catholic marriage.

But if the awarding of divorce on the civil effects of this marriage is such that it dissolves the marriage itself, would not this be a violation of canon jurisdiction which preferably has authority over that marriage (since the marriage is under canon law)?

Others have suggested that all those who are married in church are automatically married civilly, since the concordat was signed in order not to duplicate matters. But the concordat was not meant to save the couple going over the marriage twice but to validate a Catholic marriage legally for all intents and purposes, so much so that the Catholic marriage is considered a sacramental union in the eyes of the Church, while civil marriages are only human bonds.

This is therefore enough reason not to consider the concordat as a means of avoiding duplication, since in effect the two kinds of marriages are not mirror images of each other and are considered to be very different in essence.

So if all of us who got married in church have been bound only through the Church marriage which the state recognises as a legally valid bond but over which it has no jurisdiction, on what grounds can the court dissolve a Catholic marriage?