Assumed death and marriage

[GreenLantern]

Let’s say that someone, under the assumption that their spouse had died, remarries, only to find out later that their first spouse had not infact died.

Would they have committed adultery? Would the second marriage be invalid?

 

[Sir_Knight]

My parents knew a man (I remember him as well from my youth) who “lost” his wife during WWII – literally “lost” her … meaning that they were separated during the fighting and after the war he was unable to find even despite his best efforts of contacting various government agencies of numerous countries in an attempt to find her.

Despite all of this, the church would still not allow him to re-marry without positive proof that his first wife was no longer living – thus, preventing the type of situation that you described.

 

[GreenLantern]

My parents knew a man (I remember him as well from my youth) who “lost” his wife during WWII – literally “lost” her … meaning that they were separated during the fighting and after the war he was unable to find even despite his best efforts of contacting various government agencies of numerous countries in an attempt to find her.

Despite all of this, the church would still not allow him to re-marry without positive proof that his first wife was no longer living – thus, preventing the type of situation that you described.

Interesting,

So would that mean that the wives of sailors lost at sea may never remarry (assuming that they never in fact return)? Would there ever be a funeral service for a sailor lost at sea?

 

[Joannm]

Interesting,

So would that mean that the wives of sailors lost at sea may never remarry (assuming that they never in fact return)? Would there ever be a funeral service for a sailor lost at sea?

I am not positive but I think if there was a death certificate issued then it would be possible. We had a woman whose husband’s body was never found after 9/11 and she recently remarried. It was assumed she died. I would think following a battle if no survivors were found then it would be assumed that all died and death certificates would be issued and a re marriage would be allowed. Maybe the same with a natural disaster where many died.

 

[TheDoctor]

Let’s say that someone, under the assumption that their spouse had died, remarries, only to find out later that their first spouse had not infact died.

Would they have committed adultery? Would the second marriage be invalid?

I’ll play and throw in my $0.02:

Adultery = yes (technically)
Sin of adultery = no (no full knowledge that what they were doing was a sin)
Second marriage = invalid but would need a formal decree of nullity.

 

[AHapka]

I’ll play and throw in my $0.02:

Adultery = yes (technically)
Sin of adultery = no (no full knowledge that what they were doing was a sin)
Second marriage = invalid but would need a formal decree of nullity.

What he said. I would at least think that the “surviving” spouse should have made every reasonable attempt to ensure that the information was correct.

There is a point where the reasonable can turn rediculous (like a ship sinking/lost in battle), and I do agree that there is a point where one can reasonably infer death.

I do however think that it is reasonable to wait some period of time (before remarrying) depending on the situation, which is a decision probably resolved with a spiritual director or priest.

All I can say is it would be an interesting reunion many years later.

 

[mommyof4]

All I can say is it would be an interesting reunion many years later.

That’s the stuff that soap operas are made of . It happens all the time on those shows!

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Let’s say that someone, under the assumption that their spouse had died, remarries, only to find out later that their first spouse had not infact died.

Would they have committed adultery? Would the second marriage be invalid?

No they would not have or committed any sin for that matter if they had a valid civil death certificate and assumed that the person was dead because of that. The Church could possibly declare the current Marriage invalid with the new evidence.

 

[Just_Lurking]

From Theodore Mackin’s Divorce and Remarriage:

The most significant declaration on dissolution and remarriage coming from a Pope in the fifth century is from Leo I. Attila the Hun’s invasion of northern Italy in 452 was a disaster for the Roman army. Its defeat led to captivity for thousands of its officers and men. Some later returned from captivity; some did not. But in either case the bishops of the devastated north were faced with decisions about the painful situation of the wives of the captured soldiers. Could those whose husbands had simply disappeared without verification of death remarry? And what were those wives to do who after remarrying found their husbands returning from captivity?

Bishop Nicetas of Aquileia referred the second of these questions to Leo. The latter wrote in reply that the second unions must be ended, but since the wives had acted in good faith, they were not to be punished. However those who remained with their new consorts and refused to return to their husbands were to be excommunicated.