Can a catholic divorce?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rutherford2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The couples are one baptised and the other one not baptised. So is this still sacremental?
 
No, that would be a presumed valid natural marriage.

Baptized + Baptized = Sacramental

Baptized + unbaptized = natural

unbaptized + unbaptized = natural
 
Yes, Catholics can get a civil divorce but they are still sacramentally bound by marriage in the eyes of God and cannot remarry. The Church has no authority to break that bond.

That is, assuming they were validly married in the first place (and that validity is explored through the process of annulment).
 
Last edited:
I see. So a sacramental marriage is one where both are baptized and even if a civil divorce occurred and one remarried, in the eyes of God they are still married to one another.

But if the marriage is valid (one baptized, one not) then it is not sacramental (?) does that mean God holds the same view or is divorce ok in those circumstances?

Thank you for clarification.
 
Since it is not sacremental, that means annulment is valid right?
 
Yes, a valid natural marriage is until death, same as a Sacramental marriage. Civil divorce does not end a valid natural marriage.
 
The main point to understand is that a Catholic couple doesn’t have to get a civil annulment in order to get a decree of nullity from the Church later, because the civil definition of marriage and the civil process for obtaining an annulment is different than the understanding the Church has of marriage. If there is a choice to get one or the other and the couple elects the divorce because the paperwork is easier, that doesn’t matter to the investigation tribunal later.

The question the Church will have is: were the elements necessary for a valid marriage present when the vows were made? A priest can explain what those elements are and what evidence a Church tribunal would need to make a finding that the elements were absent from the beginning of the marriage.
 
Last edited:
I think the language “there was no marriage” or similar should be avoided, along with “getting an annulment.” There was what is called a putative marriage if at least one party entered into it with the right intentions. Also, there is the legal or civil part. Saying that there was no marriage when a civil divorce is necessary is confusing to Catholics and non-Catholics, alike.

Curious what the effect a civil annulment has versus a civil divorce. Asking since a divorce is needed before a person can start the nullity process.
 
A civil annulment is a declaration by the civil court that the marriage never validly happened. For example, if your spouse gets arrested and charged with bigamy because s/he was legally married to someone else prior to your wedding, then as a matter of law you were never validly married in the first place. But your marriage license is still out there, and s/he could use it to get access to, say, insurance benefits. For that matter, in many states the spouse is automatically liable for the other spouse’s medical bills. So the courts will give you a decree that you can use to get him or her out of your life — e.g., to prove that you aren’t liable for the medical bills.

In other words, a decree of nullity from the marriage tribunal of a Catholic diocese does exactly the same thing as a decree of nullity from a local circuit court. One says that the marriage never occurred in the eyes of the law; the other, that it never occurred in the eyes of the Church.
 
Do civil annulments affect the annulment process differently from civil divorce was my question. Does it make it easier or the same.
 
Last edited:
In general, they should make it easier — not for procedural reasons, but for practical ones. If you can persuade a civil court that a marriage never validly took place, then it should be fairly straightforward making the same case to a diocesan tribunal. The Church has more stringent requirements for a valid marriage than the civil courts do.

Mind you, there clearly would be exceptions— e.g., a person going through with a wedding voluntarily but planning to get divorced later might be celebrating marriage validly under civil law but invalidly under canon law. But I think that most cases qualifying for a decree of nullity under civil law would also qualify for a decree of nullity under canon law.
 
If the matrimony is celebrated by a deacon and at least one of the spouses is a non-latin catholic, it is also invalid (null).
 
TheLittleLady said:
The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177
Click to expand...
Regarding civil divorce among Catholics, I do not think anyone these days follows Canon law, I doubt most diocese even have the administrative processes in place to make it possible.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P45.HTM

That page gives the applicable law, it only deals with adultery and abuse, and it requires the local ordinary approval, although that can come later in the case of danger from abuse.
 
Rutherford2 said:
What happened to the wife and husband after they divorced? Are they able to get married with another person again?
Click to expand...
A valid marriage between two baptized (called sacramental marriage) that have consummated it (marital relations), cannot be dissolved. A marriage between two that are not both baptized, or two that are baptized but have not consummated it, can be dissolved. In that case the Church could dissolve the marriage if there was a good reason for it.
 
I understand, however, you and I are in the small minority. If asked, I’d imagine half of the priests in parishes do not know of this law.
 
Don’t worry, each diocese has a tribunal that can handle a separation case. Once a separation is granted, the spouse can “arrange civil matters” = to file a divorce case at the civil court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top