A question about MARRIAGE and the Church

[Debora123]

Is the man she married the second time Catholic - I keep reading it but maybe I am missing it.

no

 

[ValPal]

Ok, I feel some people are missing the point.

This is a hypothetical situation in which the first marriage has not and cannot be either dissolved or annulled. I’m sure it’s happened before. Let’s get to the point, folks.

Okay. You’ll need more assumptions to make your scenario work.

In order for the woman to subject to Catholic Church Law, she will have to become Catholic. The Church is not going to give her a free pass given the circumstances. This will likely include, prior to receiving the sacraments, having her and her civilly married husband agree to live as brother and sister until the marital irregularites are “fixed”, or in perpetuity, and do this of their own free will. If they do this, problem solved. If not, she’s not becoming Catholic.

 

[ebonykawai]

I guess the real question then that I’m trying to get at here is, how many other moral teachings should be taken this way? How many of them should be this strict, and how many should be taken with a grain of salt and seen as a grey issue?

That’s an awfully good question and I struggle with it, too. I know exactly where you’re coming from. I guess the answer is supposed to be zero, in a perfect Catholic world. Zero should be taken with a grain of salt. But then you see a nun who says abortion is OK, and other religious who condone contraception, and issues like this one with kids and divorce and a big mess, and it kind of hurts my heart and makes me feel discouraged.

I suppose the answer is that we’re all sinners, and none of us can really live up to God’s standards. I do the best I can, and leave the rest to the grace of God. I sure as heck don’t know everything, and I can’t possibly ever be perfect. So I just do the best I can and I pray for mercy.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Well according to the letter of the law, the women would be an adulterous living in constant sin, and the man would be in sin too because since they aren’t actually married he’d be guilty of premarital sex.

So yes, according to the letter of the law the couple would be required to separate, and the man would be free to go on and date/marry another woman.
However, I’m willing to bet the vast majority of priests out there would tell her to go on living with this man as her husband… and even most of you here have seemed to respond to the question as being kind of a grey issue.

I guess the real question then that I’m trying to get at here is, how many other moral teachings should be taken this way? How many of them should be this strict, and how many should be taken with a grain of salt and seen as a grey issue?

It’s not grey.

Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ - "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery"160 the Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists. For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence.

1651 Toward Christians who live in this situation, and who often keep the faith and desire to bring up their children in a Christian manner, priests and the whole community must manifest an attentive solicitude, so that they do not consider themselves separated from the Church, in whose life they can and must participate as baptized persons:

They should be encouraged to listen to the Word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts for justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God’s grace.161

I know a woman, who goes to Mass weekly, but she is not married in Church, because her husband was divorced. They had a son, now a grandaughter they raise. She does not receive the Eucharist. It makes her sad to have to abstain, but she does. And who knows, maybe her marriage can become sacramental. I hope so.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Would the first marriage even be considered valid? It was a civil ceremony between two people who had no clue about any of the Church’s teachings on the matter. So not only did they not enter into a sacramental marriage, but neither had any expectation of living up the Church’s requirements for a valid marriage due to their ignorance. Would an annulment even be necessary?

 

[Debora123]

Okay. You’ll need more assumptions to make your scenario work.

In order for the woman to subject to Catholic Church Law, she will have to become Catholic. The Church is not going to give her a free pass given the circumstances. This will likely include, prior to receiving the sacraments, having her and her civilly married husband agree to live as brother and sister until the marital irregularites are “fixed”, or in perpetuity, and do this of their own free will. If they do this, problem solved. If not, she’s not becoming Catholic.

Right, so basically she would have to come home to her “husband” who is not religious in the least bit and try to explain to him that they actually aren’t married and that she’s technically still married to her ex husband which is why they can no longer live as husband and wife, and must live as brother and sister.

I think most non religious men, even if they are good people, would be completely confused and hurt and angry and betrayed by this. And I think they’d have every right to leave and date/marry someone else. I think very very few would actually say “ok honey, that’s fine… I will now see you as my sister.”

So yes, this would basically be asking the lady to break up her family because that is what would happen.

 

[Debora123]

Would the first marriage even be considered valid? It was a civil ceremony between two people who had no clue about any of the Church’s teachings on the matter. So not only did they not enter into a sacramental marriage, but neither had any expectation of living up the Church’s requirements for a valid marriage due to their ignorance. Would an annulment even be necessary?

Yes, even marriage between atheists are valid in the eyes of the Church.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Ok, I feel some people are missing the point.

This is a hypothetical situation in which the first marriage has not and cannot be either dissolved or annulled. I’m sure it’s happened before. Let’s get to the point, folks.

If she was not baptized, her first marriage was not a sacramental marriage, only a natural marriage. Only Baptized people may receive the Sacraments.

A divorced and unbaptized person can potentially have the natural marriage dissolved via the Pauline or Petrine Privilege.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_privilege

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrine_Privilege

The info is from wikipedia…so I hope it’s accurate

 

[Phemie]

Ok, I feel some people are missing the point.

This is a hypothetical situation in which the first marriage has not and cannot be either dissolved or annulled. I’m sure it’s happened before. Let’s get to the point, folks.

The point is that she couldn’t become a Catholic until the situation is resolved and if she is asking for baptism I don’t think it’s simply up to the pastor to approve them ‘living as brother and sister’. Do I think there are priests who’d tell them to just keep on doing what they’re doing? Of course, just as I know priests who won’t tell a woman that getting an abortion is wrong. Does that mean they’re correct? No.

 

[Debora123]

If she was not baptized, her first marriage was not a sacramental marriage, only a natural marriage. Only Baptized people may receive the Sacraments.

A divorced and unbaptized person can potentially have the natural marriage dissolved via the Pauline or Petrine Privilege.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_privilege

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrine_Privilege

The info is from wikipedia…so I hope it’s accurate

Ok, then let’s say she was baptized in some protestant church when she was a baby though she was never brought up religious.

Again, I’m trying to get to the point here. The point is the first marriage was not and cannot be dissolved or annulled, and she is now happily married to a man with 3 children and wants to join the Church.

 

[Debora123]

The point is that she couldn’t become a Catholic until the situation is resolved and if she is asking for baptism I don’t think it’s simply up to the pastor to approve them ‘living as brother and sister’. Do I think there are priests who’d tell them to just keep on doing what they’re doing? Of course, just as I know priests who won’t tell a woman that getting an abortion is wrong. Does that mean they’re correct? No.

Ok so basically she’d have to either break up her family or she can’t be in communion with the Church.

 

[ValPal]

Right, so basically she would have to come home to her “husband” who is not religious in the least bit and try to explain to him that they actually aren’t married and that she’s technically still married to her ex husband which is why they can no longer live as husband and wife, and must live as brother and sister.

Q: Who is saying they are not married?

A: The Church they don’t belong to.

You’re putting the cart before the horse.

 

[ebonykawai]

Q: Who is saying they are not married?

A: The Church they don’t belong to.

You’re putting the cart before the horse.

Yeah, that’s right, neither of them are Catholic, she just wants to be Catholic.

Why, LOL???

 

[iloveangels]

Was the first husband a Catholic? Was he baptized at all?

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Ok so basically she’d have to either break up her family or she can’t be in communion with the Church.

Please read Catechism section I provided.

The woman in your scenario was married civally at 18 and divorced 3 years later, was Baptized Protestant, but did not practice her faith ever because it was not taught her.

1. The might get it annulled due to lack of maturity, or lack of proper understanding of what marriage was.
2. Does her church of origin recognize civil marriage? If they do not…maybe that could be a reason, she isn’t validly married in the church she currently belongs to.

 

[iloveangels]

Legitimate question - Would the church really be willing to turn away a person serious about converting through RICA solely based on something rash they’d done nearly three decades earlier?

I mean, even as an atheist, I’d like to think that if there was a God that he’d rather have someone in his flock that’s made a mistake and repented rather than risk pushing them away forever over a technicality.

This is not just a technicality. And it’s also not just about head counting.

 

[Debora123]

Yeah, that’s right, neither of them are Catholic, she just wants to be Catholic.

Why, LOL???

I guess I wouldn’t either if I was in her shoes and was being told that I couldn’t be in communion with this Church unless I broke up my family. I guess I’d turn around and run the other way - “Never mind guys, I guess I’ll just stick to agnosticism!”

 

[iloveangels]

Ok. So it’s a grey issue then.

And yes this is a hypothetical situation, though I’m sure it happens a lot.

Why do you care if it’s only a hypothetical situation? What’s the point for asking?

 

[iloveangels]

Ok, I feel some people are missing the point.

This is a hypothetical situation in which the first marriage has not and cannot be either dissolved or annulled. I’m sure it’s happened before. Let’s get to the point, folks.

If the first marriage can’t be annulled, she’s still married to the first man. And she has a problem. She’s sleeping with a man she’s not married to.

She will probably be counseled to seek an annulment in order to be admitted to the Church. If she refuses, she will have a problem being admitted to the Church in the condition she is currently. She will have to change that situation because it’s unreasonable to expect someone to maintain a state of grace in that situation.

 

[Debora123]

Why do you care if it’s only a hypothetical situation?

What do you mean?

Someone asked me if it was a hypothetical situation or if this was actually happening to someone I knew. I was just answering the question asked of me.