Folia Theologica et Canonica, Supplementum (2016)
Hanns Engelhardt, Marriage and Divorce In Anglican Canon Law
MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE IN ANGLICAN CANON LAW 61 /. England In England the traditional regulations concerning the dissolution of marriage remained in force through the reigns of Kings Henry VIII and Edward VI and further well into the 19th century. Especially the marital problems of Henry VIII had no bearing on the canon law of marriage as some may have suspected. First we must remember that problems of matrimonial law could arise only with regard to two of Henry’s six wives. There is a mnemonic verse concerning them which reads: “Divorced, beheaded, died; divorced, beheaded, survived.’’ Anne Boleyn (nr 2) and Catherine Howard (nr 5) were beheaded for high treason - no reason for a matrimonial case. Jane Seymour (nr 3) died of postnatal complications two weeks after the birth of her son and only child who was to become Edward VI, and Catherine Parr (nr 6) survived Henry - no problems either. In the remaining two cases (Catherine of Aragon and Anne of Cleves) we must remember the inaccuracies with regard to the use of the term “divorce”; both cases were clearly about “annulment”, not about “divorce”. So the dispute was not about the content of the traditional canon law but about its application in specific cases only. The authors of the Reformatio legum ecclesiasticarum held another position indeed. The Reformatio provided the possibility of divorce sensu stricto, i.e. a vinculo, in three cases: adultery, wilful abandonment and too long absence (nimis longa absentia). In all these cases the marriage was to be dissolved and the innocent party permitted to contract a new marriage.'’'' On the other hand, the Separatio a mensa et thoro was to be abolished cum a sacris Uteris aliena sit, et maximam perversitatem habeat, et malorum sentinam in matrimonium comportaverit.39 40 However, these regulations were, as we have seen, never enacted. So the canonical basis of the jurisprudence of the ecclesiastical courts in England remained the traditional canon law insofar as it did not impair the royal supremacy, which most of it didn't. The ecclesiastical courts could only grant decrees of nullity or separation. They could not allow anyone to contract a new marriage during the lifetime of a former spouse. This was the state of the law well into the 19lh century. But this is not all that can be said with regard to this matter. Human nature craving for a new possibility to get legitimate issue or at least unprohibited sexual gratification sought - and found - another resort. According to an old saying the English Parliament can do everything but turning a man into 39 De Adulteriis et Divortiis, capp. 5, 8, 9. 40 De adulteriis &c. cap. 19.
