Annulment

[1ke]

I know how the canon law is suppose to be. However I also know that people are being allowed to marry in the catholic even though they were married before and without getting an annulment.

Do you have any verifiable facts to back up such an allegation?

I was just trying to say that many people are being advised incorrectly on the need for an annulment.

Your example was of a person who received the *correct *advice.

 

[1ke]

This makes no sense to me. Why do you need annulment for a marriage that took place before bapistism,

Non-Catholic and non-Christian marriages are recognized by the Catholic Church as valid. It is not only a Catholic marriage that can be valid.

Because all marriages are presumed valid, a person would have to submit their case to the tribunal in order to determine their freedom to marry a Catholic or freedom to marry if they become a Catholic.

especially if you don’t plan to marry again.

A person does not “need” a decree of nullity if they do not plan to marry again. However, some people who don’t “plan” to remarry meet someone and change their mind.

I’m so frustrated by the confusion and revenge that seems to surround annulments.

Revenge? I’m afraid I do not understand your comment here.

If you are to be understood then you have to get an annulment during RCIA, not during the marriage process.

That would be true for a person married, divorced, and currently *remarried *who is seeking to become a Catholic.

This would not be true of a person married and divorced but currently *single *and desiring to become a Catholic.

 

[kage_ar]

The priest gave her correct information.

This makes no sense to me. Why do you need annulment for a marriage that took place before bapistism, especially if you don’t plan to marry again.

I’m so frustrated by the confusion and revenge that seems to surround annulments. If you are to be understood then you have to get an annulment during RCIA, not during the marriage process.

Try to make it simple.

Sally and Joe have never been married, neither are Catholic. Marriage is presumed valid by the Catholic Church.

Same couple, they get divorced and Sally re-marries Bob at 1st Baptist. Because of what the Bible teaches, the Church recognizes Sally as still married to Joe.

Sally can have the tribunal review the facts of her first marriage and see if it was invalid from the beginning. If it was, she is then an unmarried woman in the eyes of the Church and free to marry Bob. If the marriage to Joe was valid, she is living in sin with Bob.

Just because Sally did not know the Biblical and Church teaching on the permanance of marriage does not mean the laws do not apply to her. If she decides to enter the Catholic Church, she will then become aware of the rules.

 

[RTMirage]

I find all this very interesting. I came into the Church in 06. I am divorced but I feel that I have never been really married. I have never sought an annulment because I really am not interested in any dating or marriage. It is just lately that I have felt that I should seek an annulment even though I have no interest in anyone. Things were not good and I don’t trust my judgement. When I was single I would not date anyone who was divorced. In fact when I met someone that was my first question before I would go out with them. My exhusband told me he had never married and it was only after we had been married for over a year, our daughter was 3mo old he told me that he had been married and divorced about 10 yrs before he met me. I have the divorce papers because I sent for them. He had lied to me once so my moto became “Trust but verify”. He said that he had married in a church before (not Catholic) and we had married my Baptist Church. Have I ever really been married?

 

[teresarose]

Do you have any verifiable facts to back up such an allegation?

I was married to a catholic who was married before me outside of the catholic church. He was told he did not have to get an annulment before we got married in the catholic church, because he was not married by a priest.

Your example was of a person who received the *correct *advice.

The person I referred to before was baptized after her second husband died. If you are forgiven of all of your sins when you are baptized, why do we say she still needs to get an annulment.

 

[1ke]

Have I ever really been married?

Your ex-husband’s prior marriage and his lie to you are good grounds for nullity.

You would still have to submit paperwork to the tribunal and they would determine whether your marriage is null, and determine your freedom to marry.

You can’t just pronounce yourself free to marry.

 

[teresarose]

They revenge I spoke of refers to someone that is helping me get my annulment. She is really pushing me to do things in a way that will hurt my ex. That is why I’m getting so frustrated. I think he should be left alone.

 

[1ke]

The person I referred to before was baptized after her second husband died. If you are forgiven of all of your sins when you are baptized, why do we say she still needs to get an annulment.

Baptism can remit for the sin of divorce and the sin of remmariage.

Baptism does not dissolve a marriage or render it null.

She is still married to her first husband, as far as the Church is concerned.

She would have to have a tribunal investigation into the validity of that marriage, and her subsequent marriage, if she wanted to determine her freedom to marry in the Catholic Church.

 

[cecilia97]

They revenge I spoke of refers to someone that is helping me get my annulment. She is really pushing me to do things in a way that will hurt my ex. That is why I’m getting so frustrated. I think he should be left alone.

If you have no plans to marry, there’s nothing in the Church that says you MUST seek an annulment. I’d say (and several priests have agreed with me) that it’s best to do a nullity petition before you even get to the point of thinking you might meet someone you want to date.

Revenge is not a good reason to seek an annulment, ever.

However, if you do decide to persue a nullity petition, your ex does not have to participate. Your diocese would have to inform him of the proceedings and INVITE him to participate, but he can ignore the letter or write back saying he doesn’t want anything to do with it. That’s what my ex did and the process can go right on without him. No one has to get “hurt”.

 

[1ke]

They revenge I spoke of refers to someone that is helping me get my annulment. She is really pushing me to do things in a way that will hurt my ex. That is why I’m getting so frustrated. I think he should be left alone.

Your ex must be notified and given an opportunity to participate, although they are not required to participate.

That is not revenge.

If this person works for the diocese in an official capacity and is doing something *inappropriate *you should notify the diocese.

 

[yessisan]

The person I referred to before was baptized after her second husband died. If you are forgiven of all of your sins when you are baptized, why do we say she still needs to get an annulment.

sins don’t have anything to do with annulments.

I’ll use the same example as kage_ar.

Sally and Joe have never been married, neither are Catholic. Marriage is presumed valid by the Catholic Church.

Same couple, they get divorced and Sally re-marries Bob at 1st Baptist. Because of what the Bible teaches, the Church recognizes Sally as still married to Joe.

Regardless of Bob having died. Sally was committing adultery to Joe since she remarried. Now that Bob is dead, Sally is no longer committing adultery and is still married to Joe since no annulment has taken place.

The person I referred to before was baptized after her second husband died. If you are forgiven of all of your sins when you are baptized, why do we say she still needs to get an annulment.

Whether she was baptized before or after her second husband died, she still needs an annulment to clear her from her first marriage (if she should ever want to remarry). But the tribunal still might say that the first marriage was valid in the first place and deny the annulment.

 

[teresarose]

She would have to have a tribunal investigation into the validity of that marriage, and her subsequent marriage,** if she wanted to determine her freedom to marry** in the Catholic Church.

That was my point. She does not want to marry again.

 

[teresarose]

Thank you for helping me. I’m overwhelmed by everyone’s willingness to help.

 

[1ke]

That was my point. She does not want to marry again.

That’s fine. No one stated she *had *to puruse a decree of nullity, only that one would be necessary should she want to marry.

 

[teresarose]

That’s fine. No one stated she *had *to puruse a decree of nullity, only that one would be necessary should she want to marry.

Her priest did.

 

[1ke]

Her priest did.

Ok, here’s what you wrote originally:

My Aunt was told by a very elderly priest that she **should **get annulment for her first marriage. But she was not catholic at the time, was not married to a catholic, and was not married by a priest in either her first or second marriage. She did not become catholic until after her second husband died. Also she does not plan on ever getting married again or even dating anyone.

If she inquired about converting while her second husband was still alive then, yes, she would have been told she had to pursue a decree of nullity for her first marriage OR separation from her second husband in order to convert.

The death of her second husband changed that. She could then convert without a decree of nullity, which she did.

 

[teresarose]

interesting

 

[maplegrovedude]

I was married by a priest. In the area I am in it doesn’t seem to be impactful either way as to my religion, but for the record I do wish to convert.

The tribunal here is responsible by committee to make the decision which was negative, thus I’m in appeal.

Not sure that the first or second marriage is recognized by the Catholic Church is a priest wasn’t present. Whether she is catholic or not would not be relavent as I myself am not Catholic but need an annulment to proceed.

Blessing to you.

 

[pianoplayingmom]

I sought a decree of nullification after over 25 years of marriage. I was turned down. I reapplied, using different grounds and with the help of an advocate from the archdiocese. The first time, I used grounds based primarily on my ex-husband’s “deficiencies”. The tribunal said I hadn’t proved my case enough for them to grant me an annulment. My witnesses were hard to come by because it was so long ago so this made it more difficult. (By the way, witnesses are crucial to the process.) The second time, my grounds were based on me, as well as him. It was a very humbling experience, after having blamed my ex-husband all those years for what ailed our marriage when it turned out I’d gotten the annulment because I did not enter the marriage as I should have. I felt I had to apologize to him, after it was all said and done. It became a very healing thing but it was excruciatingly painful going through it. Initially, I decided to seek an annulment before I met someone I might want to marry. I considered dating while I was still married unethical so I didn’t. I knew that there was a possibility that I wouldn’t get an annulment and I didn’t want to remarry outside the Church and I didn’t want to break someone’s heart (or mine, for that matter) if I had to tell him that we couldn’t get married once we were serious about one another. My advice: once divorced, seek an annulment BEFORE you date anyone. It will save a ton of heartache in the end. When I was turned down, I had to come to an acceptance that God may be asking me to be single the rest of my life. That was difficult because I wanted to remarry. However, I wanted, more than anything, to obey God’s law and so I found peace through His grace. (It certainly wasn’t through myself alone.) Above all else, we must accept God’s will in our lives. The Church is our guide in this.

 

[lmcchevette]

I am getting ready to apply for an annulment. My husband never had intentions of supporting me. We had three children and he never held a job. I stuck with him for 20 years and probably would still be married if my daughter didn’t tell me he molested her when she turned 13. I confronted him and he admitted he went to my daughter because I was never home. I was working to put a roof over our heads and food on the table.

I threw him out the next day and I was sick to my stomach for months after this came out. I couldn’t keep the marriage together (if there ever was one). I finally realized he was mentally ill and I wasn’t facing the truth.

Can anyone give their opinion on my chances for an annulment? I have excellent witnesses who will go into great detail on how ill my ex-husband was.

Thanks,
Lynn