Accidently married to two people

[Joe_5859]

So the second woman could re-marry (a different man) in a Catholic Church? Does the man have any obligation to the second woman? Is the sex he had with her considered adultery?

I think you’ve received some fairly good responses from several posters. I just wanted to respond to this point. Even in the event that the Church declared the man to still be married to the first woman, this would not mean that he committed adultery. (Or even if it did, he would not be culpable for this act). The man was acting in good faith that the first woman was dead and probably had no reason to believe otherwise.

As far as his obligation to either woman, that’s a bit too tough of a question to answer in a general, hypothetical scenario. Obviously the man has obligations to the children. It is between the man, the women, and the appropriate Church authorities (and probably a few civil authorities as well) to hash out those details.

 

[cameron_lansing]

…
Since canon lawyers are lawyers afterall and probably think in “belt and suspenders” mode, they would probably do something similar. For example, the attorney would file a Can. 1701 proceeding (for lack of a better term) with the bishop seeking a declaration of presumed death, and, alternatively, a petition seeking dispensation from the bonds of matrimony (something the Holy See has the authority to do under the power of the keys).

Perhaps this invites some comment from a canon lawyer. Personally I never comment on secular law and refer inquirers to civil lawyers.

Canon 1701 would not apply unless the smoke of a non consummated marriage were to be presented, and this does not seem to be the case in the original scenario. It would be a separate matter than the question of presumed death.

Canon 1701 is found in the chapter on Procedure For Dispensation Of Ratified & Non-consummated Marriage. Canon 1707 is found in the chapter on Procedure In Presumed Death Of A Spouse. Canon 17 requires us to heed the context in which an ecclesiastical law exists, and the context of the chapters easily manifests that these are two separate juridic institutes that are to be distinguished.

Even so, not even the Roman Pontiff can dissolve from a ratified and non consummated marriage by a dispensation super rato (see c. 1141 and c. 1698).

In regard to this, we might keep in mind that, according to canon 1142, this is a personal act of the Roman Pontiff rather than one of the Holy See which is a broader notion (see c. 361). According to Pastor Bonus, art 67, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments merely examines the case, and if warranted, submits the petition to the Supreme Pontiff.

That said, either the spouse or someone who has been given a legitimate mandate may petition for the declaration in canon 1707.

However, the value of stability in the law would seem to dictate that a declaration not be subject to some periodic review since it fixes the canonical status of the petitioner as free to marry. If it were subject to some kind of continuing ratification, then the person’s status would remain doubtful and his or exercise of rights in canon 1058 (to marry if not impeded) and canon 219 (the choice of state of life) would be injured. The law disfavors instability since its purpose in part is to regulate external behavior with a view toward the salvation of souls.

However, since the status of persons never becomes a res iudica, with a certain rare exception related to nullity of marriage, a later discovery that the other spouse survived would present a perplexity to be resolved by the Holy See and perhaps the Roman Pontiff personally.

 

[PacoG]

However, the value of stability in the law would seem to dictate that a declaration not be subject to some periodic review since it fixes the canonical status of the petitioner as free to marry. If it were subject to some kind of continuing ratification, then the person’s status would remain doubtful and his or exercise of rights in canon 1058 (to marry if not impeded) and canon 219 (the choice of state of life) would be injured. The law disfavors instability since its purpose in part is to regulate external behavior with a view toward the salvation of souls.

This sounds almost identical to the secular common law doctrines of Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel and the policy reasons for having them.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**
This sounds partially like the plot to Castaway.**

Or Move Over, Darling or My Favorite Wife or Too Many Husbands or the poem "Enoch Arden."

 

[cameron_lansing]

This sounds almost identical to the secular common law doctrines of Res Judicata and Collateral Estoppel and the policy reasons for having them.

There are certain similarities of notion, intent and effect, but I would shy away from recourse to the term of “almost identical” because of a number of possible variations and applications but also because canon law has a different outlook based on its development since the two disciplines diverged historically *. Like similar secular notions, though, some fixity and stability underlie the provisions in canon law.

(*Although a little off topic, a tidbit. I briefly note that unlike secular jurisprudence from an Anglo Saxon tradition, canon law does not envision precedent and binding case law. A decision of a judge establishes the law but only for that concrete case… [Canon 16 §3. An interpretation in the form of a judicial sentence or of an administrative act in a particular matter, however, does not have the force of law, and binds only the persons for whom and affects the matters for which it was given.])

 

[Methodi]

Wrong question. The correct question is, “Who does **God **say he is married to?”

Jesus makes this quite clear. He is married to his “first” wife, until she dies. It does not make a fig’s difference what the State or even the Bishop says. “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” Officials of both the State and the Church may be misled in this manner, but God is not misled.

The man is not guilty of sin if he has no knowledge of the situation, and he acts with due diligence. But the minute he realizes that his wife is actually still alive, he must *never *lie with this “second woman” again.

Why do we have all these annullments if what God has joined together, let no man put asunder

 

[tee_eff_em]

Why do we have all these annullments if what God has joined together, let no man put asunder

What makes you think that a putative marriage later determined to have been null had been joined together by God?

tee

 

[Methodi]

What makes you think that a putative marriage later determined to have been null had been joined together by God?

tee

Because they were married in church by a priest in the presence of God.A lot of people come up with some lame excuses for wanting an annullment, to me an annullment is the same as a divorce& the Church charges you for it. Years ago people suffered through horrible mariages for the sake of their CatholicFaith under pain of excommunication

 

[sanctamaria17]

No, an annulment is a declaration that a marriage was never valid in the first place. It usually deals with the following:

Consanguinity (marriage between relatives), uninformed consent (not being able to properly consent to a Catholic marriage), previous marriage with no annulment, not getting married with the intentions to follow Catholic wedding vows (permanency, faithfulness, openness to children, etc), and possibly more.

It is NOT divorce. Divorce means a marriage existed and then broke apart. Annulment means that a marriage never existed. The presence of the priest and community does not make a marriage.

As for annulment fees, from what it sounds like, you pay a lot more in civil divorce attorney fees than to process paperwork for an annulment case and you are NOT always guaranteed one. I know couples who applied and didn’t get one.

As for the supposed ease in getting one in this country, with our culture’s attitude towards marriage, I would not be surprised if that many marriages were found to be null and void.

 

[Methodi]

No, an annulment is a declaration that a marriage was never valid in the first place. It usually deals with the following:

Consanguinity (marriage between relatives), uninformed consent (not being able to properly consent to a Catholic marriage), previous marriage with no annulment, not getting married with the intentions to follow Catholic wedding vows (permanency, faithfulness, openness to children, etc), and possibly more.

It is NOT divorce. Divorce means a marriage existed and then broke apart. Annulment means that a marriage never existed. The presence of the priest and community does not make a marriage.

As for annulment fees, from what it sounds like, you pay a lot more in civil divorce attorney fees than to process paperwork for an annulment case and you are NOT always guaranteed one. I know couples who applied and didn’t get one.

As for the supposed ease in getting one in this country, with our culture’s attitude towards marriage, I would not be surprised if that many marriages were found to be null and void.

I am Catholic & I do not believe any of that, these days in the church, no one wants to make any sacrifice, yrs ago people did make huge sacrifice for the sake of Their Church, sorry I dont buy it, I have even talked to priests who have said 6 mos down the road they dont wanna be married anymore,yrs ago people made bad marriages work, not so today. Most catholic couples are cohabitating long before they marry & still seek anullment.

 

[rinnie]

Well the women would not be in the state of sin because she did not know. But she would have to go back to her first husband. I saw that movie. Don’t ya just love lifetime My husband hates it.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Because they were married

in church by a priest in the presence of God.

I do not think you understand what a declaration of nullity means.

A lot of people come up with some lame excuses for wanting an annullment,

to me an annullment is the same as a divorce

I suppose you may hold what beliefs you wish. But understand that your view is at odds with that of the Church.

tee

 

[Cavaille-Coll]

Is anyone secretly in love with a volleyball in this instance? That could complicate things further.

 

[KellyK]

Let’s say a man and woman are married. They have three children. She is lost at sea and presumed dead. Eight years later, the man re-marries and has an addition two children with another woman. The first wife is rescued. She spend her eight years dreaming of reuniting with her husband. The husband still loves his first wife. He also loves his second wife. The children from the first marriage are now 13, 12, and 10. The children from the second marriage are 1 and newborn.

Hmm, if you added some babies switched at birth and a long-lost evil twin you could call this scenario Days of our Lives.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Hmm, if you added some babies switched at birth and a long-lost evil twin you could call this scenario Days of our Lives.

Don’t forget someone disfigured in a fire, who comes out of the bandages after plastic surgery looking like an entirely different actor.

tee

 

[Aramis]

There was a woman declared legally dead in Tacoma, who later turned up alive, in Alaska, suffering from near-total amnesia.

It does occasionally happen…

The 12-year-old missing persons case was declared a homicide, and she was noticed by a local on the news, who contacted Tacoma police.

Here’s one of the articles about her: people.com/people/archive/article/0,20122932,00.html

In her case, no prior marriage… but it’s quite possible and even plausible.

 

[Joe_5859]

There was a woman declared legally dead in Tacoma, who later turned up alive, in Alaska, suffering from near-total amnesia.

It does occasionally happen…

The 12-year-old missing persons case was declared a homicide, and she was noticed by a local on the news, who contacted Tacoma police.

Here’s one of the articles about her: people.com/people/archive/article/0,20122932,00.html

In her case, no prior marriage… but it’s quite possible and even plausible.

Yes, stranger things have happened. But in the extremely rare event that such a thing happens, I would tell those involved to go talk to their local diocesan marriage tribunal!

 

[benedictgal]

Hmm, if you added some babies switched at birth and a long-lost evil twin you could call this scenario Days of our Lives.

I believe that is one of the plots going on right now. Unfortunately, DOOL is something I will watch now and then. It’s funny. Most of the weddings happen at St. Luke’s Church, which is supposed to be Catholic. People have married, died, re-married and then come back from the dead. John, Hope and a few others are prime examples. Interestingly enough, when a wedding is filmed at St. Luike’s, are the wedding vows.

The one character who has been able to get annulments is the Salem baddie, Stephano DiMera. He seems to know about as much about the process as the canon lawyers do. Although his seem to take place in record time. Gotta love the fiction in the soaps.

 

[pnewton]

I am Catholic & I do not believe any of that,

Well, that is the teaching of the Catholic Church in regards to anullments, take it or leave it. You are not the first Catholic to reject Church teaching you disagree with.

 

[Joe_5859]

I believe that is one of the plots going on right now. Unfortunately, DOOL is something I will watch now and then. It’s funny. Most of the weddings happen at St. Luke’s Church, which is supposed to be Catholic. People have married, died, re-married and then come back from the dead. John, Hope and a few others are prime examples. Interestingly enough, when a wedding is filmed at St. Luike’s, are the wedding vows.

The one character who has been able to get annulments is the Salem baddie, Stephano DiMera. He seems to know about as much about the process as the canon lawyers do. Although his seem to take place in record time. Gotta love the fiction in the soaps.

Indeed! I always did wonder how they were able to get married in a Catholic parish without the six month waiting period most parishes have!