Am I even married at all?

[Gertabelle]

1ke, I’m not following your posts.

The first wife was alive during marriage 2 and 3, based on information contained in the OP. If the first marriage is determined to be valid, then obviously marriages 2 and 3 are invalid. In that case, the fact that the wife #1 is dead is not relevant to marriages 2 and 3, because he was not free to marry them, and because objectively invalid marriages don’t become retroactively valid.

Oh God bless you, dear one! That is exactly what I was trying to ask but could not put the words together.

Gertie

 

[1ke]

If the first marriage is determined to be valid,

The first marriage no longer exists. It will not be examined.

then obviously marriages 2 and 3 are invalid.

It isn’t obvious, because the first marriage no longer exists.

In that case, the fact that the wife #1 is dead is not relevant to marriages 2 and 3,

Yes it is relevant.

because he was not free to marry them

You don’t know that. You are assuming it. You cannot assume it. The tribunal must determine this based on the facts of the cases.

and because objectively invalid marriage don’t become retroactively valid.

No one has proven that any of the marriages are objectively invalid, excepting the current one-- which is invalid due to the wife’s Catholicity.

 

[FrDavid96]

My husband has been married three times, before me.
He was civilly divorced in each instance. He is not Catholic or even Christian in any way shape or form, but was baptised as an infant in the Church of England.

When we were married, civilly, his first wife was still alive. First wedding was proper C of E. Then she died a couple of years after our civil wedding.
Second and third wives are still alive.
My question:

If our marriage was invalid when we civilly contracted it, (because first wife was still alive and Church considered them still married, not to mention the Lack of Form issue since I am Catholic), did we start being married when wife number one died, automatically?
As if on a conveyer belt?

Or perhaps, Is he now considered married to his second wife, (wedding was proper Methodist) rather than me? As if on a conveyer belt…

I’ve spoken to a priest about annulments and all in an effort to be convalidated. I’m waiting on documents right now. I was told the second and third marriages were invalid and only had to be documented, and that we would be offered a convalidation upon acceptance of the proper death documents.

But overthinking the other day, led me to this question.

Am I even married at all?

Your priest has it right.

There will be some paperwork, but you’re already working on that with him. It will be a little more than just “documented” but still, there won’t be much.

From what you describe, no, you’re not in a valid sacramental marriage. The good news is that you’re working on making things right.

 

[1ke]

See question 17 at this site:

canonlawprofessionals.com/annulmentquestions.html

Also:

“If someone accuses many marriages successively celebrated as being null, this manner of proceeding is to be used: Before anything else, inquiry is to be made regarding the nullity of the marriage first entered: when this nullity is legitimately proved, the matrimony which next followed this is to be presumed valid: if indeed later the nullity of the second marriage has been proven, then the next following marriage is to be presumed valid, and so in turn.”

This is from a decree of the Apostolic Signatura, July 1987, in the CLSA’s 1987 Roman Replies and Advisory Opinions, pp. 58-61.

 

[Elizium23]

That doesn’t make any sense. Since the first wife has died, the first marriage will not be examined at all and will be presumed invalid? That is the only way that the validity of the second and third marriages could be presumed. Because the first marriage did exist when the second and third were attempted. So its former existence had no small impact on the subsequent attempts.

 

[1ke]

That doesn’t make any sense. Since the first wife has died, the first marriage will not be examined at all and will be presumed invalid?

No, it is not presumed invalid. It was dissolved by death. It therefore ceased to be an impediment to the subsequent marriage(s).

In other words, it is possible for an invalid second marriage to become valid upon the death of the first spouse.

I am not saying that happened in this case. But that is why each marriage must be examined sequentially and independently.

That is the only way that the validity of the second and third marriages could be presumed.

No one should be presuming validity (or invalidity) of any of the marriages. The investigation determines the facts, and per the Apostolic Signatura, they must be investigated sequentially.

because the first marriage did exist when the second and third were attempted. So its former existence had no small impact on the subsequent attempts.

But that does not automatically mean anything. It is one of the facts that will be used in determining the case.

You are reasoning from the 4th marriage backwards to the first, saying brcause there was a first all others are invalid. That is what the Apostolic Signatura disallowed in 1987. The marriages must be examined from the first forward, individually.

 

[Deltadeliquent]

Quote from reply from the arch diocese regarding this situation:

“For his 1st marriage, he would need to provide: Marriage certificate
and divorce degree absolute and death certificate.”

This presumes the first marriage was immaterial, yes? No mention of looking into its validity or not.
It seems to indicate that the first marriage won’t even be looked at because of the death of the spouse, yes?

So… He is free to be married to me, because he is a widower. I think this is the presumption of the person I was writing to.

Quote: "2nd and 3rd marriages. Since he was already married to someone and
not free to marry, no formal nullity case needs to be done. "

This seems to say they will not look into the validity of second and third marriage since the validity of the first is presumed. And death has rendered him free to marry me. First and second have no bearing on the situation since he was not free to contract marriage when he did. So, in a way, they never happened at all.

I think 1ke is saying:
The first is non existent now. Valid or not. So the investigation goes to the second, and so on. If the second of these is considered valid, he is not free to marry me. If the second is not valid, but the third is valid, he is not free to marry me. If second and third are invalid, he IS free to marry me.

My comment about the leaning of the diocese in which the procedures take place:
In a more liberal, progressive diocese the decision handed down might be different than the one handed down in a more traditional, by the book diocese. I might be speaking out of turn since I do not know much about the tribunals and where they are located or who or how their “culture” is determined. Perhaps the “culture” of the diocese has nothing to do with anything.
But I’m aware that the “culture” of a parish can result in different atmospheres and willingness to exclusive or inclusive.

It seems that by the book, the second marriage has to be determined to be valid or not valid. The subsequent rulings would follow from there. However, if the marriages are not looked into and presumed to be not valid, whether because of a more liberal view of things, or because of a desire to be as merciful as possible, the proceedings may not be followed, by the book.
Thus my comment about the liberal “culture” of the diocese I happen to find myself in.

I’m a little concerned because if I am aware they might be cutting corners and I get a positive result because of it, is it not the same as presenting two objects stuck together to the checkout and not speaking up when the cashier only charges for one? My knowledge of the corner cutting making me culpable?

This all might be moot, since I doubt very much my husband is will willing to do much more than fill out a form in a cursory manner. He won’t be willing to say much about the circumstances of the previous marriages or tell his life story.

Ok, I’m bowing out now, as suggested, and speaking to a spiritual director in person.
But I will be reading any further responses.
Although I have a lot riding on this, I am curious from a purely intellectual view as well. The ins and outs of the law, canon and otherwise, has always fascinated me.
Peace.

 

[1ke]

My knowledge of the corner cutting making me culpable?

You can always contact The St Joseph Foundation for assistance.

stjosephcanonlaw.com/

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

The first marriage no longer exists.

Stating “the first marriage no longer exists” means the first marriage was valid, otherwise the statement is false. Therefore, subsequent attempts at marriage while that spouse was alive cannot be valid.

If an invalid attempt at marriage by the spouse that is validly married to someone else alive at the time of the invalid attempt at marriage can become retroctively valid, I think it would be proper to reference the appropriate authoritative Church documents on that matter. I have never heard of an illicit and invalid sacrament become valid due to an event at a future date.

 

[Elizium23]

No one should be presuming validity (or invalidity) of any of the marriages. The investigation determines the facts, and per the Apostolic Signatura, they must be investigated sequentially.

You yourself have said, over and over, that marriage enjoys the favor of the law. A marriage is putatively valid until it is proven otherwise. Therefore everyone must be presuming validity of these marriages until they are found invalid.

 

[Gertabelle]

No, it is not presumed invalid. It was dissolved by death. It therefore ceased to be an impediment to the subsequent marriage(s).

In other words, it is possible for an invalid second marriage to become valid upon the death of the first spouse.

I am not saying that happened in this case. But that is why each marriage must be examined sequentially and independently.

No one should be presuming validity (or invalidity) of any of the marriages. The investigation determines the facts, and per the Apostolic Signatura, they must be investigated sequentially.

But that does not automatically mean anything. It is one of the facts that will be used in determining the case.

You are reasoning from the 4th marriage backwards to the first, saying brcause there was a first all others are invalid. That is what the Apostolic Signatura disallowed in 1987. The marriages must be examined from the first forward, individually.

Consider a different case:

Ted marries Ann in his Anglican church. Some years later, they divorce.

Ted marries Barbara. Some years later, they divorce. Barbara (a never-been-Catholic Christian) meets a wonderful Christian (non-Catholic) man who has never been married, they marry in their church, and have many beautiful babies If Barbara and her husband have a conversion experience and decide to become Catholic, will Ted and Ann’s marriage receive the benefit of law with a presumption of validity? Would the process of annulment be a simple one, such as the so-called “lack of form” that a Catholic would receive if he/she married outside the Church without a dispensation?

Ted marries Clare. Some years later, they divorce. Clare also has a conversion experience and enters the Church. She falls in love and desires marriage in the Catholic Church. Again, would the process of annulment be a simple one, such as the so-called “lack of form” that a Catholic would receive if he/she married outside the Church without a dispensation?

Ted marries Diane, a Catholic, in a civil ceremony.

Ann dies, and Diane decides it’s time to get right with God and His Church

My questions are directed at what I am perceiving is your assertion that these annulment proceedings will be the full-blown process that takes a 1-2 years per marriage. I admit my ignorance in the annulment process, except for the “lack of form” type that I went through.

I just can’t wrap my brain around the idea that the OP’s husband’s 1st marriage ending by death, makes his second marriage now valid :hypno: And THIS is why the Church requires documentation of all baptisms, marriage attempts, divorces, decrees of nullity…!!!

1ke, I hope you’re not getting frustrated with my questions. Thanks for the simple and straightforward way you’ve been responding to my and others’ questions and challenges.

Gertie

 

[1ke]

Stating “the first marriage no longer exists” means the first marriage was valid, otherwise the statement is false. Therefore, subsequent attempts at marriage while that spouse was alive cannot be valid.

The first marriage may or may not have been valid. But because the first wife is no longer living, it will not be examined. **

If an invalid attempt at marriage by the spouse that is validly married to someone else alive at the time of the invalid attempt at marriage can become retroctively valid

I did not say the marriage becomes “retroactively valid”. Although that is exactly what sanation does, I am not talking a about sanation or retroactive anything. If an impediment ceases, or found not to exist, the marriage could become valid at that point.

I have never heard of an illicit and invalid sacrament become valid due to an event at a future date.

And now you have.

 

[1ke]

If Barbara and her husband have a conversion experience and decide to become Catholic, will Ted and Ann’s marriage receive the benefit of law with a presumption of validity?

Each marriage will have to be examined, in order.

IWould the process of annulment be a simple one, such as the so-called “lack of form” that a Catholic would receive if he/she married outside the Church without a dispensation?

No.

Again, would the process of annulment be a simple one, such as the so-called “lack of form” that a Catholic would receive if he/she married outside the Church without a dispensation?

No.

I
My questions are directed at what I am perceiving is your assertion that these annulment proceedings will be the full-blown process that takes a 1-2 years per marriage.

Each marriage must be investigated, sequentially. How long that takes and what grounds are used depend on many factors.

I just can’t wrap my brain around the idea that the OP’s husband’s 1st marriage ending by death, makes his second marriage now valid :hypno: And THIS is why the Church requires documentation of all baptisms, marriage attempts, divorces, decrees of nullity…!!!

We don’t know that any of the marriages were valid. We don’t know they are invalid. We know that each must be examined. We know it is possible that a second marriage can become valid if an impediment such as prior bond ceases (death of first wife). We do not know it is the case here, in fact I rather doubt it, but we can’t presume.

I1ke, I hope you’re not getting frustrated with my questions. Thanks for the simple and straightforward way you’ve been responding to my and others’ questions and challenges.

Gertie

No I am not frustrated at all.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

The first marriage may or may not have been valid. But because the first wife is no longer living, it will not be examined. **

It doesn’t need to be examined, because it is presumed valid. And because it is presumed valid, all subsequently marriages are by default invalid.

With regard to the subsequent marriage attempts, I’m not sure how one attempts to go about proving a presumed invalid marriage attempt invalid…it is by definition invalid.

And now you have.

I’ve heard a lot of things over the course of my life. But hearing others opinions on a particular matter doesn’t make it true.

Can you please provide the authoritative Church reference?

 

[1ke]

It doesn’t need to be examined, because it is presumed valid. And because it is presumed valid, all subsequently marriages are by default invalid.

With regard to the subsequent marriage attempts, I’m not sure how one attempts to go about proving a presumed invalid marriage attempt invalid…it is by definition invalid.

I’ve heard a lot of things over the course of my life. But hearing others opinions on a particular matter doesn’t make it true.

Can you please provide the authoritative Church reference?

I’ve already provided the citation from the Apostolic Signatura. Each marriage must be investigated sequentially starting with the first, which is not “presumed valid”.

 

[Elizium23]

The notion that a valid marriage may come into existence spontaneously upon removal of impediments is bizarre, lacks evidence, and most of all, does not square with what we know to be true about marriage law in the first place.

Jimmy Akin writes, “A valid marriage comes into existence upon the valid exchange of matrimonial consent between two parties that are free to marry each other and not otherwise impeded.”

That seems abundantly clear. The matter and form of the Sacrament of Matrimony are the free exchange of consent between the parties. It is an act of will that makes a marriage.

Now oftentimes an invalidly married couple must remove impediments to their marriage and then have a convalidation performed. If a marriage magically became valid upon the death of the spouse, then a marriage would magically become valid upon removal of other impediments, such as a declaration of nullity of a prior marriage. In fact, that scenario makes even more sense if we consider that a marriage declared null was never valid in the first place, and so the hypothetical couple really have validly exchanged consent back in their marriage ceremony and have been validly married all along. But that’s not how it works. After a declaration of nullity is issued then the couple still must arrange for a convalidation observing Catholic form - or a radical sanation - the performance of either reveals that the invalid marriage did not suddenly become valid as soon as the tribunal banged their gavel.

Your document from the Apostolic Signatura proves nothing and is completely silent about this phenomenon of marriages suddenly becoming valid without effort. It also doesn’t say anything about an exception for a dead spouse. It says EVERY marriage must be examined in turn, not every marriage with living spouses.

 

[Rence]

1ke, I’m not following your posts.

The first wife was alive during marriage 2 and 3, based on information contained in the OP. If the first marriage is determined to be valid, then obviously marriages 2 and 3 are invalid. In that case, the fact that the wife #1 is dead is not relevant to marriages 2 and 3, because he was not free to marry them, and because objectively invalid marriage don’t become retroactively valid.

He may have been free to marry the second one. If the first marriage is found to be invalid, then the second one will have to be examined.

Look at it this way: If the tribunal examines marriage 1 and finds it to be valid it automatically makes marriages 2 and 3 invalid. And the OP can thank her lucky stars because they never existed and she can have her marriage, the fourth one, convalidated.

BUT, if they find the first marriage invalid, the chain of examinations continues. IF the first marriage is found to be invalid, then the man was free to marry his second wife (remember the marriage existed. It doesn’t just disappear because he married two more times after that). It may be valid if the first one was invalid, so now the second marriage is examined for validity. If it’s found valid, then marriage 3 and 4 are not valid. If it’s found invalid, then the examination moves on to marriage 3.

If the they find the second marriage valid, then the examinations stop there, and he is still married to marriage 2. But if they find the second marriage invalid, then the OP’s husband was free to marry wife 3. Marriage 3 doesn’t go away just because he divorced wife 3 and married wife 4. It still has to be examined if marriage 1 and 2 were invalid, because he would have been free to marry and this may be a valid marriage and needs further examination.

It starts with the first marriage. The best case scenario for the OP was that it was a valid marriage, because it will invalidate marriage 2 and 3. But unfortunately, if it’s considered invalid, the next one has to be examined, and the chain continues until they reach marriage 4.

 

[Rence]

It doesn’t need to be examined, because it is presumed valid. And because it is presumed valid, all subsequently marriages are by
default invalid.

The second marriage is not default invalid just by assuming marriage 1 is valid. Marriage 1 has to be examined first, for validity, in order to determine whether marriage 2 was valid or invalid.

 

[1ke]

The notion that a valid marriage may come into existence spontaneously upon removal of impediments is bizarre, lacks evidence, and most of all, does not square with what we know to be true about marriage law in the first place.

This case involves noncatholics. No requirement of canonical form.

That seems abundantly clear. The matter and form of the Sacrament of Matrimony are the free exchange of consent between the parties. It is an act of will that makes a marriage.

then a marriage would magically become valid upon removal of other impediments, such as a declaration of nullity of a prior marriage. In fact, that scenario makes even more sense if we consider that a marriage declared null was never valid in the first place, and so the hypothetical couple really have validly exchanged consent back in their marriage ceremony and have been validly married all along.

Yes exactly.

But that’s not how it works. After a declaration of nullity is issued then the couple still must arrange for a convalidation observing Catholic form - or a radical sanation - the performance of either reveals that the invalid marriage did not suddenly become valid as soon as the tribunal banged their gavel.

For a Catholic, yes. But we are not talking about Catholics. The original consent given between the non Cathilics suffices. There is no convalidation. The Catholic requires convalidation due to form, no such additional impediment exists for the non Catholic.

Your document from the Apostolic Signatura proves nothing and is completely silent about this phenomenon of marriages suddenly becoming valid without effort. It also doesn’t say anything about an exception for a dead spouse. It says EVERY marriage must be examined in turn, not every marriage with living spouses.

Canons 1085 and 1675 speak to these issues. And normally the first marriage would not be challenged due to death if the spouse but 1675 allows for it in some circumstances.

Ok I will now reiterate: the OP needs an experienced canon lawyer in the diocese to help her. This is a complex case. I think it unproductive to continue as it may stress out the OP even more.

 

[Phemie]

Canons 1085 and 1675 speak to these issues. And normally the first marriage would not be challenged due to death if the spouse but 1675 allows for it in some circumstances.

Ok I will now reiterate: the OP needs an experienced canon lawyer in the diocese to help her. This is a complex case. I think it unproductive to continue as it may stress out the OP even more.

The OP has already said what is happening: none of the three marriages will be examined, that the first marriage is presumed valid and the other two invalid and proof of death of the first wife is sufficient for them to have a convalidation.