A problem time

[tommmcg]

Hi
Hope i’m in the right place.
I’m divorced and have recently married a wonderful woman who is catholic and strongly believes in her religion.
She plays the organ at most funerals held within our parish and also at various masses during the week. The problem we have is that because both myself and my former wife were both baptised church of scotland, i apparently, was not free to marry despite my previous marriage being conducted by a registrar and not a minister. As a result of this, my wife has been told by our local priest not to present herself for communion. this has, and is, causing her great distress and while she realises that she has not followed the churchs rules, feels that this is an unjust judgement.
Any help or guidance on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Regards
tommmcg

 

[ConstantineTG]

Sorry to hear how your wife feels. But that is a just judgment. Perhaps you should move to have the Church investigate your previous marriage and if possible declare it null and void. This will make you free to marry your current wife and her standing in the Church will be restored.

 

[tommmcg]

Thanks Constantine TG. Already been told that an anullment wouldn’t be possible even if we were to try for one

 

[ConstantineTG]

Thanks Constantine TG. Already been told that an anullment wouldn’t be possible even if we were to try for one

Who told you? You should bring it to someone who’s trained to handle such cases. Not all priests are. The Archdiocese should have at least one expert, talk with that person.

 

[tommmcg]

Many thanks Constantine TG. It was our current and previous parish priests who told us. We’ll look for help from the Archdiocese as you suggest.

 

[momor]

Absolutely check it out further. If you were not even married in a church ceremony by a minister it’s hard to see how the Catholic Church would call that a valid marriage in the eyes of God.

Your wife is not validly married in the Church and is therefore considered to be committing adultery. It is this sin on her part that is keeping her from receiving communion, not just the facts of your prior marriage.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Many thanks Constantine TG. It was our current and previous parish priests who told us. We’ll look for help from the Archdiocese as you suggest.

You can also consult a canon lawyer who specializes with annulments, if you can find one in your area.

 

[tommmcg]

@ momor Thats what we’re thinking. We can’t understand how my previous marriage could be valid in the eyes of god when no minister took part. From that point of view, our parish priest is basically saying that if two christians that did not get married by a minister of religion divorce, neither of them are free to marry a catholic.

 

[Skeptic92]

Hi
Hope i’m in the right place.
I’m divorced and have recently married a wonderful woman who is catholic and strongly believes in her religion.
She plays the organ at most funerals held within our parish and also at various masses during the week. The problem we have is that because both myself and my former wife were both baptised church of scotland, i apparently, was not free to marry despite my previous marriage being conducted by a registrar and not a minister. As a result of this, my wife has been told by our local priest not to present herself for communion. this has, and is, causing her great distress and while she realises that she has not followed the churchs rules, feels that this is an unjust judgement.
Any help or guidance on this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Regards
tommmcg

Contact your Diocesan Marriage Tribunal, the fact you were both baptised, and were married by a registrar, should be enough for a lack of form anullment, move forward with anullment proceedings, and live as brother and sister with your wife, and she should be allowed to present herself for communion, however that requires complete abstinence untill the marriage can be validated.

Can i also ask where you was married to your current wife ? Registry office or a Catholic Church?

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Yes, that is exactly what the church teaches.

When two baptized non-Catholics marry, the Catholic Church accepts that as a valid marriage. It doesn’t matter if they say their vows in a registry office or in a church. They are saying their vows to each other and God. That marriage is valid.

If they divorce and one of them wants to ask the Church to investigate to determine if there was an impediment at the time they said their vows, and if the Church determines that there was something existing at that time that prevented this from being a valid marriage, then they would free to marry again and a Catholic could marry one of them.

The Church imposes an additional requirement on Catholics that they must marry according to the laws of the Church. Therefore, a Catholic who marries outside of the church is not in a valid marriage.

A Catholic cannot marry someone who is legally divorced if their marriage was a valid one. A valid marriage is not ended by a legal divorce.

Your present wife must have been aware of all this at the time you two got married or else you would have been able to be married in the Catholic church.

I concur with the other posters that you should have the Church examine your first marriage to see if you may possibly be free to marry in the Church.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

Contact your Diocesan Marriage Tribunal, the fact you were both baptised, and were married by a registrar, should be enough for a lack of form anullment, move forward with anullment proceedings, and live as brother and sister with your wife, and she should be allowed to present herself for communion, however that requires complete abstinence untill the marriage can be validated.

Can i also ask where you was married to your current wife ? Registry office or a Catholic Church?

Not true. A lack of form only applies to Catholics who marry without following the Church’s laws.

According to the description he gives, his former marriage was valid in the eyes of the Church unless the tribunal determines there was some impediment.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Not true. A lack of form only applies to Catholics who marry without following the Church’s laws.

According to the description he gives, his former marriage was valid in the eyes of the Church unless the tribunal determines there was some impediment.

I highlighted the important part of your statement. That is the reason why the OP must seek the marriage tribunal, to get an official and final answer. Everything here on the forums is just advice and opinion.

 

[momor]

When two baptized non-Catholics marry, the Catholic Church accepts that as a valid marriage. It doesn’t matter if they say their vows in a registry office or in a church. They are saying their vows to each other and God. That marriage is valid.

God isn’t part of a civil marriage. Can you imagine how many atheists would be up in arms if the state required God to be part of civil marriage? The Catholic Church recognizes the church marriages of other baptized Christians (or a marriage performed by a minister in any setting).

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I highlighted the important part of your statement. That is the reason why the OP must seek the marriage tribunal, to get an official and final answer. Everything here on the forums is just advice and opinion.

Exactly. The tribunal would look at the state of mind of the two people and their circumstances at the time they entered into the first marriage to determine if any impediment existed at that time that would have affected their ability to freely enter into a committed, lifelong marriage.

I have had friends who went through the annulment process and found the experience to be positive and healing. They were seeking to do God’s will. And they were willing to accept the fact that they might not be able to marry if it was determined that their previous marriages were valid.

This is a terribly difficult situation to find oneself in and I pray for the OP and his wife.

 

[ConstantineTG]

God isn’t part of a civil marriage. Can you imagine how many atheists would be up in arms if the state required God to be part of civil marriage? The Catholic Church recognizes the church marriages of other baptized Christians.

God is a part of every marriage. The same way God is a part of the lives of atheists. Whether its in the ceremony or not, God is part of everything, of all of creation.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

God isn’t part of a civil marriage. Can you imagine how many atheists would be up in arms if the state required God to be part of civil marriage? The Catholic Church recognizes the church marriages of other baptized Christians.

You are incorrect. The Catholic Church recognizes the civil marriages of other baptized Christians as well.

The state does not require God to be part of a civil marriage.

Nevertheless, God is part of the marriage of baptized Christians, whether they are married in a civil or a religious ceremony. The Church considers both these marriages to be sacramental in nature.

It is only Catholics that the Church require to be married in front of a priest or other Catholic witness approved by the bishop, or to get a dispensation from this.

Do you imagine that the Catholic Church thinks that Protestants who don’t get married in front of a minister are living in sin?? Certainly not!

 

[momor]

God is a part of every marriage. The same way God is a part of the lives of atheists. Whether its in the ceremony or not, God is part of everything, of all of creation.

I’m sure you understood what I was saying

One does not take a marriage vow before God, until death do us part unless one chooses to do so. I see no reason to think that God recognizes a civil ceremony that excludes any mention of him as being a valid marriage any more than we believe God recognizes a Catholic’s marriage as valid outside of receiving the sacrament.

That is not to say it doesn’t still have to come before the Tribunal for a decision.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’m sure you understood what I was saying

One does not take a marriage vow before God, until death do us part unless one chooses to do so. I see no reason to think that God recognizes a civil ceremony that excludes any mention of him as being a valid marriage any more than we believe God recognizes a Catholic’s marriage as valid outside of receiving the sacrament.

There are two things here. First, sex is a statement by body and soul of union. If you have sex with someone, you are becoming one body with that person. So even without words, our actions through sex is a statement of desire of union (among other things) with that other person. Of course the act should be unitive, that is why contraception is a no-no, so does same-sex relations.

The Catholic Church recognizes non-Catholic marriages by non-Catholics as valid (subject to freedom from impediments) because you cannot oblige non-Catholics to follow Catholic law. But marriage is marriage, one makes a vow and consumates the marriage with another, its a marriage.

 

[momor]

There are two things here. First, sex is a statement by body and soul of union. If you have sex with someone, you are becoming one body with that person. So even without words, our actions through sex is a statement of desire of union (among other things) with that other person. Of course the act should be unitive, that is why contraception is a no-no, so does same-sex relations.

The Catholic Church recognizes non-Catholic marriages by non-Catholics as valid (subject to freedom from impediments) because you cannot oblige non-Catholics to follow Catholic law. But marriage is marriage, one makes a vow and consumates the marriage with another, its a marriage.

How can a marriage be valid in the eyes of God if the 2 parties to the marriage never had any intention of making a vow before God or viewing their marriage or their sexual union in any way as sacramental? Wouldn’t those Christians who had that intention be married by a minister?

What I am trying to say is that if someone had only a civil marriage that did not include a vow taken before God, chances are good the Tribunal is going to find a way to declare an impediment existed for someone who is now wanting to have a sacramental marriage.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I’m sure you understood what I was saying

One does not take a marriage vow before God, until death do us part unless one chooses to do so. I see no reason to think that God recognizes a civil ceremony that excludes any mention of him as being a valid marriage any more than we believe God recognizes a Catholic’s marriage as valid outside of receiving the sacrament.

That is not to say it doesn’t still have to come before the Tribunal for a decision.

Nevertheless, the Catholic Church does indeed recognize this as a valid and sacramental marriage. Since this is church teaching we can believe that God recognizes this marriage.

I think most people would be very insulted if you suggested to them that the reason they married before a judge instead of in church means that they don’t intend that this is a real marriage ‘until death do us part’.