Annulments

[tinalewis]

Yay!!! My point exactly!!

Why wouldn’t a newly Catholic couple want their marriage to be all these things: valid, licit and sacramental?

As I mentioned previously, my husband and I had to have our marriage convalidated before I was allowed into the church last year. But even if that weren’t the case, we wanted it to be 100% valid, licit, and sacramental. Let’s say we had been married as a first marrage for both in a Protestant church, then we would still want our priest to officiate over our now-Catholic marriage.

In fact, we did it again when my husband came into the church this year - although we would have renewed our vows anyway, and as far as I know it wasn’t required to have another ceremony because of my husband’s new status. The reason we asked to have another marriage ceremony was that now my husband was Catholic, whereas last year when we got married, he was still a Protestant.

This year we are 100% Catholic, both of us, and we wanted a 100% valid, licit, sacramental marriage between two fully Catholic adults. And that’s what we got this year, and it was worth it.

It just wouldn’t feel complete to have it any other way. Maybe other married couples who enter the church feel differently, and the church agrees with them, but we wanted more.

 

[Phemie]

Yay!!! My point exactly!!

Why wouldn’t a newly Catholic couple want their marriage to be all these things: valid, licit and sacramental?

As I mentioned previously, my husband and I had to have our marriage convalidated before I was allowed into the church last year.

Was there a previous marriage for either one of you that required a decree of nullity? Otherwise I don’t see why you would need a valid marriage convalidated.

But even if that weren’t the case, we wanted it to be 100% valid, licit, and sacramental. Let’s say we had been married as a first marrage for both in a Protestant church, then we would still want our priest to officiate over our now-Catholic marriage.

In fact, we did it again when my husband came into the church this year - although we would have renewed our vows anyway, and as far as I know it wasn’t required to have another ceremony because of my husband’s new status. The reason we asked to have another marriage ceremony was that now my husband was Catholic, whereas last year when we got married, he was still a Protestant.

This year we are 100% Catholic, both of us, and we wanted a 100% valid, licit, sacramental marriage between two fully Catholic adults. And that’s what we got this year, and it was worth it.

That’s what you had before you renewed your vows after your husband became Catholic.

It just wouldn’t feel complete to have it any other way. Maybe other married couples who enter the church feel differently, and the church agrees with them, but we wanted more.

But again, that’s not a convalidation.

If two baptized non-Catholics are married without impediments in their own church or even at the town hall (as long as they aren’t Orthodox) they are in a VALID, SACRAMENTAL marriage. Even if they become Catholic, there is nothing more the Church offers as far as marriage is concerned. OK, they can renew their vows in the Catholic Church but that has no sacramental value since they are already in a sacramental marriage. They aren’t any more or better married for renewing their vows.

 

[tinalewis]

They aren’t any more or better married for renewing their vows.

It’s more and better for us. We feel it as something more and better for us because it’s two Catholics celebrating marriage together in a Catholic ceremony. What could be lovelier and more beautiful than that? If Protestant marriage ceremonies were more and better Catholic than Catholic marriage ceremonies, then Catholics would be married in Protestant churches. We wanted to be married in a Catholic church as two Catholics and we’re both happy we did!

And yes, we did need to have our marriage convalidated before I was alowed to become Catholic last year. Again, it was all worth it!

There is a difference . . . and whether strictly church-necessary or not . . . to have our priest, the priest who welcomed us each into the church, confirmed us both, and presided over our First Holy Communion Masses to also preside over our Catholic marriage vows. We would recommend this to any couple who have just entered the church, whether strictly required or not. Maybe it’s just one of those things about being in love with each other and with the church.

Was it absolutely necessary for us to do it this year? For us, it was certainly desirable.

Why wouldn’t we want to do it? I can’t think of a reason not to.

Oh, yeah, that’s right - because it wasn’t necessary. My husband and I don’t limit ourselves to doing only what’s necessary. We act based on what’s in our hearts. Other couples should do what they feel is in their hearts. I’m really grateful to our priest and to our witnesses who honored our heartfelt wishes!

 

[Phemie]

As long as you understand that you were renewing your vows, not “Getting Married in the Catholic Church” and there would be no record of anything other than your original convalidation before you were received into the Church.

 

[JulianN]

It’s more and better for us. We feel it as something more and better for us because it’s two Catholics celebrating marriage together in a Catholic ceremony. What could be lovelier and more beautiful than that? If Protestant marriage ceremonies were more and better Catholic than Catholic marriage ceremonies, then Catholics would be married in Protestant churches. We wanted to be married in a Catholic church as two Catholics and we’re both happy we did!

And yes, we did need to have our marriage convalidated before I was alowed to become Catholic last year. Again, it was all worth it!

There is a difference . . . and whether strictly church-necessary or not . . . to have our priest, the priest who welcomed us each into the church, confirmed us both, and presided over our First Holy Communion Masses to also preside over our Catholic marriage vows. We would recommend this to any couple who have just entered the church, whether strictly required or not. Maybe it’s just one of those things about being in love with each other and with the church.

It sounds like this was lovely, and important to you and your husband. However, unless there was some impediment to your marriage to begin with, what you experienced was not a convalidation – it was a renewal of your marriage vows.

Was it absolutely necessary for us to do it this year? For us, it was certainly desirable.

Why wouldn’t we want to do it? I can’t think of a reason not to.

Oh, yeah, that’s right - because it wasn’t necessary. My husband and I don’t limit ourselves to doing only what’s necessary. We act based on what’s in our hearts. Other couples should do what they feel is in their hearts. I’m really grateful to our priest and to our witnesses who honored our heartfelt wishes!

 

[Texas_Roofer]

But we are the ones

“we” are who? a couple of baptized protestants in their second marriage may be happy to tell you they met your definition, however they do not met the sacramental requirements

declaring sacramentality, since most other Churches don’t consider marriage a sacrament. Since the Catholic Church says that 2 validly married baptized Christians are in a sacramental marriage she is also the one who defines “valid”.

Well that is better “2 validly married baptized Christians” however the legal standard, the protestant standard, and the catholic standard are all different. So “valid” depends on who you ask, until a least one party is catholic the church is not asked, or has any say.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I am glad you are happy

Yay!!! My point exactly!!

Why wouldn’t a newly Catholic couple want their marriage to be all these things: valid, licit and sacramental?

As I mentioned previously, my husband and I had to have our marriage convalidated before I was allowed into the church last year.

That would only occur if an impediment existed, and could only occur after the impediment was removed

But even if that weren’t the case, we wanted it to be 100% valid, licit, and sacramental. Let’s say we had been married as a first marrage for both in a Protestant church, then we would still want our priest to officiate over our now-Catholic marriage.

officate over a renewal of vows, see the marriage had already occurred

In fact, we did it again when my husband came into the church this year - although we would have renewed our vows anyway, and as far as I know it wasn’t required to have another ceremony because of my husband’s new status. The reason we asked to have another marriage ceremony was that now my husband was Catholic, whereas last year when we got married, he was still a Protestant.

This year we are 100% Catholic, both of us, and we wanted a 100% valid, licit, sacramental marriage between two fully Catholic adults. And that’s what we got this year, and it was worth it.

It just wouldn’t feel complete to have it any other way. Maybe other married couples who enter the church feel differently, and the church agrees with them, but we wanted more.

It would seem to be a concern that one does not feel fully bound by the original wedding vows?