Annulment Question

[jbenade]

I was married 33 years ago in a Methodist Church. I was baptized Catholic but not raised in the faith. Same for my husband.

Five years ago we were received in the Catholic Church. I waited six months to convalidate the marriage. I had serious reservations. As was told by our priest, we lived together “as brother and sister” during those six months. When I did decide to convalidate the marriage, I was still leary, but felt pressured and did it.

The marriage has a long history of adultery, porn use, etc. Thus, my reservations.

So here is my question: IF I were to look into a decree of nullity, would I answer the questions from the date of marriage from 33 years ago? Or would I answer them from the date of convalidation?

Thank you.

 

[AussieTrish]

Hi, a marriage is valid or invalid at the time of marriage, so the question of validity relates to the date of marriage.
If a baptized Catholic marries outside the Catholic Church with no permission from the Catholic Church, it would be invalid.

May God guide you both in your decision as to whether to work for and validate your marriage.

 

[Vico]

I was married 33 years ago in a Methodist Church. I was baptized Catholic but not raised in the faith. Same for my husband.

Five years ago we were received in the Catholic Church. I waited six months to convalidate the marriage. I had serious reservations. As was told by our priest, we lived together “as brother and sister” during those six months. When I did decide to convalidate the marriage, I was still leary, but felt pressured and did it.

The marriage has a long history of adultery, porn use, etc. Thus, my reservations.

So here is my question: IF I were to look into a decree of nullity, would I answer the questions from the date of marriage from 33 years ago? Or would I answer them from the date of convalidation?

Thank you.

The actual marriage occurs from the date of the convalidation. See canon law:Simple

Can. 1160 A marriage which is null because of defect of form must be contracted anew in canonical form in order to become valid, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 1127, §2.

Can. 1127 §2. If grave difficulties hinder the observance of canonical form, the local ordinary of the Catholic party has the right of dispensing from the form in individual cases …

Radical

Can. 1161 §2. Convalidation occurs at the moment of the granting of the favor. …

Can. 1163 §1. A marriage which is invalid because of an impediment or a defect of legitimate form can be sanated provided that the consent of each party persevere …

 

[Just_Lurking]

As a practical matter, you will be asked questions about both times.

The first thing to establish is whether you were married under the 1917 code of canon law or the 1983 code of canon law. The transition date was November 27, 1983.

 

[Phemie]

As a practical matter, you will be asked questions about both times.

The first thing to establish is whether you were married under the 1917 code of canon law or the 1983 code of canon law. The transition date was November 27, 1983.

She says she was married 33 years ago so obviously it was under the 1917 Code.

 

[1ke]

So here is my question: IF I were to look into a decree of nullity, would I answer the questions from the date of marriage from 33 years ago? Or would I answer them from the date of convalidation?

It’s all relevant.

The marriage became valid when you exchanged consent at the convalidation. However, the things you mention that led up to the convalidation, and your 33 year history of civil marriage, matter.

 

[jbenade]

But it was convalidated in 2010. So would it not be the 1983 Code of Canon?

 

[1ke]

But it was convalidated in 2010. So would it not be the 1983 Code of Canon?

Your original exchange of consent was under the 1917 code, the convalidation under the 1983 code.

But, a Catholic married outside the Church married invalidly under both codes.

Really, what you need to do is just go sit down with your pastor and talk to him about your situation.

 

[jbenade]

My pastor advises me to remain married but live separately. He discourages annulment as, he says, I’m 54 and probably don’t want to remarry.

I go to the Latin Rite so they’re pretty tough on this kind of thing.

 

[Phemie]

My pastor advises me to remain married but live separately. He discourages annulment as, he says, I’m 54 and probably don’t want to remarry.

I go to the Latin Rite so they’re pretty tough on this kind of thing.

Do you mean that you are divorced and your Pastor doesn’t want you to seek an annulment? Seems rather presumptuous of him to asssume you’ll never wish to remarry. You’re only 54 and could live another 40 years or more.

 

[Xantippe]

My pastor advises me to remain married but live separately. He discourages annulment as, he says, I’m 54 and probably don’t want to remarry.

I go to the Latin Rite so they’re pretty tough on this kind of thing.

I would not advise you to remain legally married but to live separately long term.

From the legal and financial point of view, that is asking for trouble. If you are living separately, your assets and finances need to be fully separated. Oh, and make an appropriate will as soon as you can.

I think you ought to talk to a non-TLR priest. It sounds like your pastor has some idiosyncratic views.

Best wishes!

 

[Phemie]

But it was convalidated in 2010. So would it not be the 1983 Code of Canon?

I think I know where the poster who asked the question was going with this. There was a ~24 year period after the implementation of the 1983 Code where the fact that she was not raised in the Faith might have been relevant to the status of her marriage outside the Church.

 

[Phemie]

I have to agree with the previous poster. To protect yourself financially you need legal recourse.

 

[1ke]

My pastor advises me to remain married but live separately.

Your pastor is not a lawyer. If he is advising your to do so, then you need to talk to a lawyer about a formal separation or other legal agreement.

He discourages annulment as, he says, I’m 54 and probably don’t want to remarry.

He’s a mind reader and a fortune teller? Sounds a little presumptuous to me.

I go to the Latin Rite so they’re pretty tough on this kind of thing.

The TLM is part of the same Catholic Church everyone else is a part of. There is not “tough” or “easy” there is only Catholic. The LAW of the Church is what matters.

I encourage you to approach your diocesan chancery office to discuss your situation. Especially if it was your priest pressuring you to convalidate.

 

[Xantippe]

I encourage you to approach your diocesan chancery office to discuss your situation. Especially if it was your priest pressuring you to convalidate.

That would really alter things if your pastor had been pressuring you to convalidate against your better judgment.

 

[Eliza10]

Do you mean that you are divorced and your Pastor doesn’t want you to seek an annulment? Seems rather presumptuous of him to asssume you’ll never wish to remarry. You’re only 54 and could live another 40 years or more.

Seriously!

And your pastor does not know what God wishes for you. Maybe God wants you to know what its like to be truly married, and He will have that vocation for you. Because in the eyes of God, when annulled, your first marriage never was.

Since you suspect your marraige is “not a marraige”, it is a great relief to know what is the truth of the matter in God’s eyes. The annulment process is very healing in that it gives closure, and, like the words “Your sins are forgiven” in the Confessional gives you the huge gift of* knowing* where you stand with God concerning the state of your confessed sin, it is a great, great grace to *know *the final judgement of the Church and of Heaven on the state of that marriage. So much better than living “not sure”, and just guessing what God says of it.

And someday you will know what is God’s call for the rest of your life. If its marraige, then it sure helps to know you are free to marry. If its not marraige, then it still is such a completing gift to know what God’s verdict, entrusted to His Church, is of the effort you made at marraige for so many years.

And I agree with the other posters that besides the divide of not knowing where you stand in God’s eyes, to be essentially un-married but living in the eyes of the law as if you are married is unwise financially and legally.

So I think your priest is wrong. You hear rumors that the Church gives out too many annulments (which I think is based on feeling, not fact - a feeling, IMO, that divorce is a big problem and the Church ought to be able to make ill-fated marriages stay together happily simply by refusing to give them any way out of the mistake of marrying in the first place). Your priest may have the good intention of protecting the Church’s reputation by making sure there are fewer annulments, but I think this is mistaken (and not pastoral!).

 

[jbenade]

Wow, some great advice and OBSERVATIONS which had never occurred to me.

Bottom line, I beg God every day, every night, to let him know what His Will is in this marriage. Not mine. But His. Because if it were mine, and my 20 and 24 year old’s were OUT OF THE HOUSE - I’d be gone in a New York minute.

And God know it. He know the WHOLE story from beginning to this moment. Every tear I’ve shed. Every pain I’ve endured. Every desperate moment during the long silent treatments I’ve been subjected to.

When I was in the hospital having a radical hysterectomy because my husband gave me an STD that nearly killed me - God was with me.

I do worry about my kids because I’ve always told them that marriage is a forever deal, because I wanted to end this insidious generational sin in my family.

But, alas, it is not my job to do that. I’ve carried the weight of the world on my shoulders since I was 9 years-old.

I can’t do it anymore.

 

[Xantippe]

When I was in the hospital having a radical hysterectomy because my husband gave me an STD that nearly killed me - God was with me.

That’s just awful.

I’m so sorry.

 

[jbenade]

Yes, awful. And something I didn’t know I had until AFTER the convalidation. I would hope a Tribunal would take that into consideration.

Alsoo, the Church I was received in, and the priest who married us, are not the same as where we go now. The priest who married us didn’t pressure us, or me. But he didn’t give much counseling on the matter, either.

When I finally succumbed six months later to go ahead and marry, the only thing he had us do was to go to 2 marriage prep classes.

First - what a joke. I’ve been married for 28 years at that point. I could have taught those little kiddies in the class a few things, myself.

Second, both classes were on NFP! Are you kidding me, Father? We’re in our 50’s. I don’t think NFP classes are applicable in our situation!

It was just - so lame.

And yes, the priest I go to now does seem to have some idiocyncracies. I do respect him greatly. He’s a very good priest. But, yes, presumptuous to think I might not want to remarry. I’m 54. Not 80.

 

[Xantippe]

Yes, awful. And something I didn’t know I had until AFTER the convalidation. I would hope a Tribunal would take that into consideration.

That sounds really important.

I think you’ll find talking to a different priest more helpful. I’d suggest listening to some different sermons and going with somebody who seems smart and compassionate.

Best wishes!