Can someone give me their opinion on this

[WhatIf]

This is way off subject, but I just wondered how your priest handled the baptism of your daughter. Was there any trouble with it?

If you are to abstain, is your husband able to do this without feeling unloved and overly tempted to stray? HOw does your husband feel about the whole thing?

I would think the best thing to do is to avoid Communion until the marriage is recognized as being valid, although it would be difficult not receiving Communion.

Your priest may misunderstand the Church rules on dealing with your particular situation. I don’t know, but considering the danger you may put your marriage in by abstaining for such a long period, i would do my best to find out if there is anyway to spead up the process and still be according to Church Law. 5 months is a long time for a couple, especially a young couple. I think it tempts people with adultery. Your relationship certainly could be strengthen through marital chastity, but if your husband isn’t up for the challenge, there could be serious problems.

So, where does your husband stand on this issue? Is he totally dedicated to Church Teaching or does he not understand the whole situation and get frustrated by your unwillingness to have sex?

 

[otm]

You are doing fine, and so is your priest. There may not be a law specific to the situation, but there certainly is an issue of prudential judgement which your parish priest is right to exercise, and he has done so.

Stay the course.

Worry less.

Pray more.

Discipline is hard; sexual discipline can be very hard, but it has much merit. Don’t beat yourself up, and try not to get into the same situation again. If you or your husband, or both of you are tempted, pray together.

In fact, pray together if you are not tempted.

I think you will both be able to look back on this time as a time of grace, and stess, and growth; and hopefully later on in your lives together you will be able to look back with some humor.

God Bless!

 

[JustSomeGuy]

JSG, I may have missed your point somehow, but I think you are saying that Kerri is allowed to have conjugal relations right now.

yes that is exactly what i am saying. the Church teaches that marriage was ordained for human beings by God from the “beginning”. the union of man and woman is imprinted into the very nature of people. marriage exists, not by virtue of religion, but by virtue of creation. the Church does not teach that those married in the Church are doing something good and holy, and those outside the Church are not. note CCC 1601: it is “established between themselves.” the Church does teach that Catholics must enter into that bond in the context of the Sacrament of Matrimony because Christ “elevated” that union “to the dignity of a sacrament.” He did not erradicate other marriages, but marriage has become informed by the mystery of the Trinity revealed by Jesus.

when we start asking questions of validity, we are trying to answer questions about what must be done to sanctify the marriage. that is, how do we elevate the marriage to the dignity of a sacrament. a “validly” existing marriage is one where the convenant has been established, but that convenant must now be blessed by the Church (with all the spiritual and theological implications that that implies.) an “invalid” marriage is one where the convenant between the man and woman has not been established, even if the two have been acting as if it has. in this case the Church requires that the marriage ceremony be performed. the fact that the marriage was created in the context of societal law does not mean that the man and the woman did not create the marriage convenant. a civil marriage is not always valid and all civil marriages are not always invalid. the Church teaches that the ordained minister is only the witness and facilitator of the convenant made between the couple. he is not required to create the bond. he is required to make it a sacrament.

the question to be asked is ‘was the marriage convenant created by these two people?’ the answer appears to be yes, by the statements in this forum, the testimony of behavior over time, children, etc. the Church does not intend to destroy families under the auspices of upholding the sacraments. valid marriage is a question of natural law, the divine decrees for all humans by virtue of their creation. Church law augments, interprets and fulfills natural law, it does not nullify it. btw, if you turned this around (and perhaps even asked the same priest) if you could annul this marriage for the purpose of marrying someone else in the Church, you’ll find out pretty quick that the Church recognizes the existance of your current marriage convenant. i’d bet my last beer on it.

I really do respect our parish priest. He has only been with us for about two years. He really is a great priest.

i am not saying that the guy is a bad person. but he can still be wrong. talk to another priest. you should not mention your priest’s name. the problem is not whether you have to wait and prepare for the sacrament. the problem is whether you are being given a proper interpretation of your real life circumstances. in wider application, this policy would cripple RCIA for married people converting to Catholicism.

the reason i recommend asking another priest is to prevent hurting anyone’s feelings. if you challenge his views, he will likely act like most other humans and become defensive.

remember that you need to settle this for the sake of the Church, and to defend yourself and your husband. people have a right to proper access to the sacraments. you may have to wait six months for the sacrament, which may be the normal preparation time (it is in my diocese) but you do not need to create injury and animosity between each other in the mean time. there is a reason that you have so much trouble not having relations. conjugal love between spouses is your right and is the natural consequence of your bond. it is normal and possible to abstain for a time, but it must be the willing consent of both people (see 1 Cor 7:5-6). it cannot be imposed upon a married couple.

i don’t know anything about how you appraoch the sexual aspect of your relationship, but if you put yourself in situations where things could happen, they likely will. i hope the best for you. if you don’t do anything to correct this, you will have a long six months ahead of you.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

There may not be a law specific to the situation, but there certainly is an issue of prudential judgement which your parish priest is right to exercise, and he has done so.

that is false. he doesn’t have that right and any conception of “prudential judgement” does not apply here. this is not a question of “let’s err on the side of good.” this is a destructive imposition, based on and justified by false conceptions of marriage. the idea that a priest can randomly impose his will on the faithful because it seems right to him is ridiculous. only within a very limited scope can he interpret doctrine and impose behavioral restrictions on people.

hopefully later on in your lives together you will be able to look back with some humor.

yeah, hopefully. but is that what the Church is about. suffer today because it might be funny tomorrow. does anyone wonder what contributes to an atmosphere of obsurdity and scandal, when something that doesn’t seem right is just endured instead of investigated and satisfactorily explained?

 

[km112482]

WhatIf:

This is way off subject, but I just wondered how your priest handled the baptism of your daughter. Was there any trouble with it?

If you are to abstain, is your husband able to do this without feeling unloved and overly tempted to stray? HOw does your husband feel about the whole thing?

I would think the best thing to do is to avoid Communion until the marriage is recognized as being valid, although it would be difficult not receiving Communion.

Your priest may misunderstand the Church rules on dealing with your particular situation. I don’t know, but considering the danger you may put your marriage in by abstaining for such a long period, i would do my best to find out if there is anyway to spead up the process and still be according to Church Law. 5 months is a long time for a couple, especially a young couple. I think it tempts people with adultery. Your relationship certainly could be strengthen through marital chastity, but if your husband isn’t up for the challenge, there could be serious problems.

So, where does your husband stand on this issue? Is he totally dedicated to Church Teaching or does he not understand the whole situation and get frustrated by your unwillingness to have sex?

We actually had no trouble at all baptizeing our daughter. We both did not have to take a preperation class because we had already taken it in the past three years for our God Children. We just had to call the office and give our information. The best part is they stress so much that we actually are not married yet we get a church bulletin and envelopes for the collection every week. So obviously they consider us something.

My husband is not quite where I am at in my faith so it is hard for him, but he said that he respects the way I feel and that though it will not be easy if this is truely the way I want to go about it he respects that. I know that he is having a bit of a hard time, and I hate the fact that it is almost like we cant even go near each other because we are afraid that something will happen. I just don’t understand why the priest would want us to be put in the near occassion of sin. He knows there is no way one of us can move out. We have no impediment because neither of us were married before, so no thing is stopping us from convalidating our marriage. My husband’s aunt had the same situation a few years ago except she was married to a divorced man. At the time we had a different preist, but he told them if it wasnt for the waiting of the annulment he could have convalidated their union right away. Well we dont even have that situation yet we have to prepare like an engaged couple would for six months.

I dont want to disrespect my parish priest at all, so I am afraid to talk to him about it. But he knows everything about us and I go to confession every week almost because I am so afraid that any little thing that happens is a sin. He said he can tell I am going through a deep conversion and that God knows that it isnt easy to be living a certain life and then have to change to a different way for a little while. So I guess maybe he wants us to make this sacrafice to teach us something I really dont know, but when I meet with him tomorrow I will bring it up as nice as possible and the worst he can say is we still have to wait five more months. I will pray about it today. I will let all of you know what happens with that tomorrow.

Thanks and God Bless,
Kerri

 

[otm]

JustSomeGuy:

that is false. he doesn’t have that right and any conception of “prudential judgement” does not apply here.

Perhaps you would care to elucidate why the Church does not have this authority?

JustSomeGuy:

this is not a question of “let’s err on the side of good.” this is a destructive imposition, based on and justified by false conceptions of marriage.

I don’t see it as destructive, any more than any penance willfully accepted is destructive. Any destructiveness is in the way that they choose to accept, reject, or fight the issue. From her posts, she is struggling with temptation, but they have both in good faith accepted the imposition. That is not destructive.

Further, I fail to see any false conception of marriage. This is not about the validity of a natural marriage, it is about the Sacrament of Marriage.

JustSomeGuy:

the idea that a priest can randomly impose his will on the faithful because it seems right to him is ridiculous.

Perhaps I misread the thread, but I believe that this is also coming from the bishop, so your charge of randomness does not stand. Furthermore, your charge does not stand if it has a rational basis. The basis the priest is imposing it is that he has, for reasons not given to us, a concern that the Sacrament of Marriage is entered into with full understanding and consent. That is not random, but rather specific and focused. And as far as imposing his will, he is the shepard who stands in the place of the bishop, and the bishop, I would submit, has legitimate authority to determine the administration of the Sacraments; this appears to be well within the authority of the bishop, and by delegation, the authority of the priest to determine.

JustSomeGuy:

only within a very limited scope can he interpret doctrine and impose behavioral restrictions on people.

This has nothing to do with doctrine. It has to do with discipline. Discipline is within the jurisdiction of the bishop, and by delegation, within the jurisdiction of the priest. A similar issue is the one over baptism of a child; the priest has the right to withhold the Sacrament if in his opinion the child will likely not be raised in the Faith. While there is a legal Canonical right to the Sacraments, it is not an unfettered right. It is further an issue of moral theology; if one of the parties is Catholic at the time of the non-sacramental marriage, they are bound by Canon law to the form of the Sacrament. Failing to obtain a Sacramental marriage leaves them in fornication every time they have intercourse.

JustSomeGuy:

yeah, hopefully. but is that what the Church is about. suffer today because it might be funny tomorrow. does anyone wonder what contributes to an atmosphere of obsurdity and scandal, when something that doesn’t seem right is just endured instead of investigated and satisfactorily explained?

That they suffer is apparent. I did not intend to make light of it. However, suffering is not something that the Church urges us to avoid, but rather embrace; a concept that is contra-cultural. And I don’t see the legitimate inquiry into the real intent of a couple to enter into The Sacrament of Marriage to contribute to either absurdity or scandal; in fact, I see just the opposite: a real and deep awareness of the meaning and importance of the Scramental bond, as opposed to the casual, almost laize-faire attitude of many Catholics towards marriage which has lead so many to the divorce courts, to second, invalid marriages without an annullment, and to the application for so many annullments. It looks to me that this priest, rather than giving scandal, is trying to make sure that scandal doesn’t occur.

 

[km112482]

otm:

Perhaps you would care to elucidate why the Church does not have this authority?I don’t see it as destructive, any more than any penance willfully accepted is destructive. Any destructiveness is in the way that they choose to accept, reject, or fight the issue. From her posts, she is struggling with temptation, but they have both in good faith accepted the imposition. That is not destructive.

Further, I fail to see any false conception of marriage. This is not about the validity of a natural marriage, it is about the Sacrament of Marriage.
Perhaps I misread the thread, but I believe that this is also coming from the bishop, so your charge of randomness does not stand. Furthermore, your charge does not stand if it has a rational basis. The basis the priest is imposing it is that he has, for reasons not given to us, a concern that the Sacrament of Marriage is entered into with full understanding and consent. That is not random, but rather specific and focused. And as far as imposing his will, he is the shepard who stands in the place of the bishop, and the bishop, I would submit, has legitimate authority to determine the administration of the Sacraments; this appears to be well within the authority of the bishop, and by delegation, the authority of the priest to determine.This has nothing to do with doctrine. It has to do with discipline. Discipline is within the jurisdiction of the bishop, and by delegation, within the jurisdiction of the priest. A similar issue is the one over baptism of a child; the priest has the right to withhold the Sacrament if in his opinion the child will likely not be raised in the Faith. While there is a legal Canonical right to the Sacraments, it is not an unfettered right. It is further an issue of moral theology; if one of the parties is Catholic at the time of the non-sacramental marriage, they are bound by Canon law to the form of the Sacrament. Failing to obtain a Sacramental marriage leaves them in fornication every time they have intercourse.

That they suffer is apparent. I did not intend to make light of it. However, suffering is not something that the Church urges us to avoid, but rather embrace; a concept that is contra-cultural. And I don’t see the legitimate inquiry into the real intent of a couple to enter into The Sacrament of Marriage to contribute to either absurdity or scandal; in fact, I see just the opposite: a real and deep awareness of the meaning and importance of the Scramental bond, as opposed to the casual, almost laize-faire attitude of many Catholics towards marriage which has lead so many to the divorce courts, to second, invalid marriages without an annullment, and to the application for so many annullments. It looks to me that this priest, rather than giving scandal, is trying to make sure that scandal doesn’t occur.

I am sorry this post caused people to argue that is not what I meant it to be. I just wanted advice on the issue. I know that sometimes in this life we have to suffer and Jesus wants us to embrace our crosses and that is exactly what my husband and I are trying to do.

I realize that the priest means well because he wants us to go into this marriage for the right reasons. I will just offer this time of suffering up to God because it could always be worse. I will just count the blessings I have and thank God for them. I will keep saying my prayers, attending weekday masses, going to the adoration chapel, and saying my rosary. I appreciate all the advice.

God Bless,
Kerri

 

[Pug]

btw, if you turned this around (and perhaps even asked the same priest) if you could annul this marriage for the purpose of marrying someone else in the Church, you’ll find out pretty quick that the Church recognizes the existance of your current marriage convenant. i’d bet my last beer on it.

This point interests me, though I’d use my last beer to cook a bratwurst. (My dinner was quite delicious tonight…mmm) Usually if you have a defect of form, like being a Catholic who married outside the Church without dispensation, this is an annulment in the bag if you want one. Even so, it would take a little time. I wonder how this relates to the marriage having the favor of the law thing in canon 1060. I have included 1059 as somewhat relevant to the ongoing discussion:

Can. 1059 Even if only one party is Catholic, the marriage of Catholics is governed not only by divine law but also by canon law, without prejudice to the competence of civil authority concerning the merely civil effects of the same marriage.
Can.1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

I agree that if two non-baptized atheists marry by justice of peace, this is recognized as being married by the Church and relations as being fine. It just would not be a sacrament. Also your point is true that the two people make the marriage with their consent. It isn’t the priest (witness) who really makes it.

Good luck with your discussion with the priest tomorrow, Kerri.

 

[puzzleannie]

km112482:

Hi, my husband and I are going through the process of convalidating our civil union. We are going through the six month preperation period as an engaged couple would. I am ok with it for I understand that it is the right thing to and we are not married in the eyes of the church so we are basically just an engaged couple. Kerri

I am puzzled why you were told there is a 6 month waiting period. That is for engaged couples who have never been married or attempted marriage. Your situation is entirely different pastorally. You do not take the same classes or Engaged Encounter. Most dioceses offer a convalidation conference, which is very helpful but not mandatory. To go through the Focus test and discussion and meet with sponsor couples is ludicrous for someone who has been living together for some time and has children. The usual practice is to convalidate as soon as the couple has had a chance to understand Church teaching on marriage as a sacrament, ascertain that they are free to marry and counsel on how to proceed with the sacraments, confession, and communion (and confirmation if necessary). There is no requirement to be confirmed, in fact, confirmation cannot be received until you are in a state of grace i.e. until the marriage situation is rectified. It should be more like 6 weeks than 6 months. Did you get your information, may I ask from the priest or from a secretary or other person? It is true that you conduct yourselves as brother and sister until you are truly married, but 6 months is an entirely unnecessary burden.

 

[km112482]

puzzleannie:

I am puzzled why you were told there is a 6 month waiting period. That is for engaged couples who have never been married or attempted marriage. Your situation is entirely different pastorally. You do not take the same classes or Engaged Encounter. Most dioceses offer a convalidation conference, which is very helpful but not mandatory. To go through the Focus test and discussion and meet with sponsor couples is ludicrous for someone who has been living together for some time and has children. The usual practice is to convalidate as soon as the couple has had a chance to understand Church teaching on marriage as a sacrament, ascertain that they are free to marry and counsel on how to proceed with the sacraments, confession, and communion (and confirmation if necessary). There is no requirement to be confirmed, in fact, confirmation cannot be received until you are in a state of grace i.e. until the marriage situation is rectified. It should be more like 6 weeks than 6 months. Did you get your information, may I ask from the priest or from a secretary or other person? It is true that you conduct yourselves as brother and sister until you are truly married, but 6 months is an entirely unnecessary burden.

Ok I will give you our background in the faith. We are both baptized, made first confession, first communion, and confirmation. We have both always been catholic. I even attended catholic school all my life. When we got married neither of us really went to church, and we were in a difficult situation with me being pregnant. We at the time were selfish and said since we werent practicing our faith we would just get married civally. Afterwards I thought about blessing it but did not feel right because we did not go to church every weekend and didnt practice our faith well enough. When my little girl was born I started going back to church because I wanted to raise her in the faith and did not feel right about just baptizing her and never practicing our faith and raising her that way. So after that I started to go through a deep conversion. My husband is not totally there yet, but he is doing better and respects how I feel about our faith. I called the priest at the beginning of February when I finally felt comfortable calling him. It took till the end of the month to meet with him because of his busy schedule and the fact that my husband works offshore on an oil rig in the gulf of mexico every now and then and he isnt home that often. When we finally met with him he said I know yall probably thought i would marry yall right away but we only do that if you have been married for at least ten years or so and yall have not been married long enough. He said he wants to make sure we are not just in the marriage because of our daughter. But believe me that is not the case. Yes it speeded up the marriage process but we always planned on getting married. I just feel like he is acting as though our parents are making us. We decided to get married when we did on our own. No ones opinion mattered only ours.

When he said he was basically treating us like an engaged couple it did hurt my feelings. He did say the ideal situation would be for one of us to move out, but he wasnt gonna send spies to see if we really did that. But I told him that that will not happen cause I am not raising my daughter by myself for six months that makes no sense to break our family up that is not my little girls fault that we did not get married in the church in the first place. I just feel like it is a punishment. I know he means well, but it just upsets me.

I guess because from day one we got a bulletin from the church and envelopes to send money to them, but yet we are an engaged couple to them. They gave us no trouble baptizing our daughter either. I know that I have to respect the rules and I assume the reason he is doing this is because the bishop makes him do this with eveyrone. I really am not sure, but I will talk to him about it today.

God Bless, Kerri

 

[Ham1]

You really need to talk to another priest. I am sure your priest has all the right intentions. Perhaps I could even see his reasoning if you didn’t have any children, but you do. It would seem that yoru marriage out to be quickly and quietly convalidated.

God Bless!

 

[km112482]

Ham1:

You really need to talk to another priest. I am sure your priest has all the right intentions. Perhaps I could even see his reasoning if you didn’t have any children, but you do. It would seem that yoru marriage out to be quickly and quietly convalidated.

God Bless!

Well my husband and I met with the priest this morning. We had to take the test that engaged couples take. I felt so stupid cause it was questions pertaining to people who are not married, so it did not make sense that we were takeing it. I asked him about setting a date and he said oh no you cant yet. He said we can set one that wont necessarily be permanent for six months from now if you want, but you really shouldnt till we get the test results back.

He said the reason he wants to get the test back is to make sure we are compatible and that we did not just hurridly get married because of the baby. He said that if the test indicate this then we will need further counseling before the wedding. My husband needless to say is just so agravated. He didnt even want to talk about it when we got home. He said you mean to tell me a test is gonna determine how much I love you and if we have problems in our marriage.

He said the reason we have to wait is because we have only been married for about a year and that if we were of another religion it would be different cause the bishop would just take care of that for us, but it is differnet cause we are both of the catholic faith and we basically publically said that we didnt care about their rules. I agree we were selfish to not get married in the church, but I cant change what happened and I am trying to do the right thing now and i feel like I am being punished for not doing the right thing in the first place.

I just felt so stupid in the meeting today like we were being scolded. I mean he said it nicely, but I wish I would have never asked him anything in the first place.

He also said if yall were married for ten years or so it would be different and I said well they basically did nt follow the church rules either so what makes them different from my husband and I and he was just like it is different.

I am so discouraged now and I dont want to be, but what else can I do we have to get married in my parish so I cant go to another priest without him knowing about it. I just feel bad going behind his back to talk to another priest is all.

I guess I will just lift all this up to our Lord and in the end it will turn out ok I am sure. I just hope this doesnt put a strain on our marriage cause my husband is getting more and more fustrated everday.

God Bless, Kerri

 

[JustSomeGuy]

I guess I will just lift all this up to our Lord and in the end it will turn out ok I am sure. I just hope this doesnt put a strain on our marriage cause my husband is getting more and more fustrated everday.

in this regard, you are right. while it is discouraging, don’t get discouraged. and tell your husband the same thing. offering this difficulty to Jesus is powerful. at the same time, that sacrifice to Him need not also mean inaction. these feelings don’t come from nowhere. the immediate perception is that you are being asked to prove your love for God by abstaining from sex. the Holy Spirit may be asking you to prove that love by presenting this situation (which as you know by know i think is unjust) and asking you to act on His behalf.

seeking counsel from another priest isn’t ratting him out. you don’t have to use names, you can even do the “i have a friend that…” routine. he’ll respect that. he knows if you didn’t have an issue, you wouldn’t be seeking guidence. you don’t have to go to war against your priest. you just have find out the truth. besides, a faithful priest will also see it as his duty to protect anyother person who might be subjected to this. don’t just tell him your thoughts, tell him your emotions also and your desire to be righteous toward the Church.

i feel like I am being punished for not doing the right thing in the first place.

you are. and that is what is wrong with this. if it were doctinally true that your marriage bond does not exist, then you wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. you would need to endure, even though punishment seems unfair. (even now, remember that punishment for sins here is lot better than waiting for punishment in hell. even when penance seems like punishment, it is not.) the reason that you shouldn’t have to endure this is that he is wrong. if he intends penance or punishment for you, whatever discipline he imposes must be in line with doctrine. the previous poster, who mentioned “discipline”, failed to make that vital distinction. given the degree to which this proest would have to disregard teaching, i do not see him innocent or ignorant. it sound to me like he is fed up with the state of the world and all the sinners in it and that he’s ‘gonna do something about it.’ he seems to think that your situation is bogus and he is doing all he can to prove it to you.

in the following post, i will outline according to canon law why he is wrong. i hope you don’t mind me writing at such length about your case. i really think keeping the Church on track with stuff like this. i feel we have to always be consistent. i don’t want to look like a moron by recommending the Church to someone, only to have them show up and get treated like garbage. a previous poster asked why i think this is absurd. i hope that is obvious. he asked why this is scandalous, also. broken marriages don’t scandalize the Church, they scandalize the couples. while this is not sex with boys, this too is scandalous. he wants you to physically split up your family! if the pope were in the room when he said that, he’d 've hit him in the head with a bible.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

otm:

Failing to obtain a Sacramental marriage leaves them in fornication every time they have intercourse.

this is a very good statement of the priest’s error. the status of your marriage is that it is invalid, not non-existent. by the fact that you are both Catholic, you cannot enter into a valid marriage outside the Sacrament of Matrimony (cf. can.1055§2). the sacrament is the only valid form for Catholics. however, this doesn’t mean that the two lacked valid consent, thus establishing marriage by natural law. (cf. can. 1100.) under a liberal interpretation of the law, because you were pregnant at the time you were married, you could not give ‘free and willing consent’. marriage is the only valid motive for marriage, and the pregnacy became a factor in marrying *at that time *(cf. can.1103,[fear of the social implications of an illegitimate child].) but a case for consent can still be made (cf. can. 1057§2) and should be assumed. (can. 1060.) if you had married in the Church under those circumstances, which few if any priests would allow, your marriage could (given the state of American marraige tribunals) be determined to be invalid on the grounds of consent alone. there are two impediments to the validity of your marriage. the first is removed by the fact that you will marry in the Church. the second is removed by reasserting your consent now (can. 1159).

all of this validity/non-validity mumbo jumbo is because the Church upholds the sanctity of marriage. Christ lifted up and restored marriage to the original dignity given by our Creator. it is offensive to God to not recognize that and join Him to your union. that is why validty/non-validty matters to the faithful. since God ordained marriage for all from the beginning, all people can create the marriage bond commanded by Him, and are bound to do so, if they are going to participate in the “one flesh union” that is a component of that bond. while you lacked the faith and circumstances to create a sacramental marriage, you still can and did create a non-sacramental marriage (can. 1057§1, cf. can.1055§2 [you cannot have a *valid marriage, but you can have an invalid one. see can. 1061§3]). by the divine, natural law, you are not fornicators.

the underlying presumption of what i am saying is that i also think (though more facts could change this) that your marriage is not annulable [if that’s a word]. as the marriage bond enjoys “the favor of the law” i cannot see, given the fact that you were two confirmed Catholics at the time, making the determination that you didn’t create a permanent bond (cf. can. 1096§2, 1099, 1057). what i mean is, despite other problems that may invalidate the marriage, i don’t think informed Catholics can contract marriage that is not eternal. i give no harbor to anyone who says that at the time they didn’t take it that seriously or whatnot (can. 1099, 1060). the American Church dissolves marriages for whatever plausible reason that can be found.

what this priest has done is, in his mind, annulled your marriage, and is now imposing moral conditions that are required of non-married people. only a bishop can unilaterally do that (can. 1075§1), and that would be a crude application of Church law and his power.

if i were you (but i’m also a hot-headed trouble maker) i’d go to another priest and state my case. you can even print this and have him read it. if it is not right, make him tell you why. given the circumstances, you can also request a dispensation over this, either from this new priest as a confessor, or from the bishop, which would be done in writing. that may seem extraordinary now, but you’ll have 5 months to think about it. this is what canon law was created for. it is your right to use it to prove your case, or to require that it be used to prove their case to you.

this is the vatican’s online version of the law: vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM

 

[puzzleannie]

what you have to say now makes more sense. You “had” to get married (in the popular expression), you have only been married a year. If you had come the priest when you first found out about the baby, he would probably have couselled you not to marry, to take time to make sure that was not the only reason. the reason is that if that IS the only reason, it could invalidate the marriage due to forced consent, not free consent. Is he someone who knows you and your families well, and is in a position to know about your background and your relationship with each other? Have you spoken with him about your conversion experience, and the underlying reasons you are not seeking full communion with the church and the sacraments? This is key knowledge he should have to help him counsel you properly. Quite frankly if you were my daughter, I would have no difficulty in seeing why the priest wants you to take time, especially if you and your husband are not “on the same page” with all of this.

none of us can second guess your priest, and nor should we. remember he can only proceed based on the info you give him. he may feel he does not have all the background yet he needs to counsel you effectively and does not want to push things before you are ready. this is NOT the time to go priest=shopping, sounds like he has your best interests at heart. Be honest and open with him, accept his guidance. If both of you are sure convalidation is what you want, with all that being married in the Church implies-acceptance of children, educating them in the faith, etc., BOTH of you, then there should be no delay in convalidation and returning you to the sacraments.

If you priest is counselling delay, he feels he has good reason. Please work with him. Pray like mad, both of you, and pray together.

 

[km112482]

puzzleannie:

what you have to say now makes more sense. You “had” to get married (in the popular expression), you have only been married a year. If you had come the priest when you first found out about the baby, he would probably have couselled you not to marry, to take time to make sure that was not the only reason. the reason is that if that IS the only reason, it could invalidate the marriage due to forced consent, not free consent. Is he someone who knows you and your families well, and is in a position to know about your background and your relationship with each other? Have you spoken with him about your conversion experience, and the underlying reasons you are not seeking full communion with the church and the sacraments? This is key knowledge he should have to help him counsel you properly. Quite frankly if you were my daughter, I would have no difficulty in seeing why the priest wants you to take time, especially if you and your husband are not “on the same page” with all of this.

none of us can second guess your priest, and nor should we. remember he can only proceed based on the info you give him. he may feel he does not have all the background yet he needs to counsel you effectively and does not want to push things before you are ready. this is NOT the time to go priest=shopping, sounds like he has your best interests at heart. Be honest and open with him, accept his guidance. If both of you are sure convalidation is what you want, with all that being married in the Church implies-acceptance of children, educating them in the faith, etc., BOTH of you, then there should be no delay in convalidation and returning you to the sacraments.

If you priest is counselling delay, he feels he has good reason. Please work with him. Pray like mad, both of you, and pray together.

The priest does know about my conversion. He also understands me and Kenny’s situation, but he is new to the parish so we had to explain our background for him.

My husband may not be where I am at in my faith, but he respects the way I feel about our faith and shows that to me everyday. Believe me I dont know many people at least around where I live whose husbands would practice abstinence for six months. But my husband knows how much this means to me and he also wants to convalidate our marriage and raise our daughter in the faith. (I have explained all this to the priest as well).

I am in no means going to shop around for priest because I have prayed over it and decided that obviously this is what God wants for us and it is his will, so we will respect our priest eventhough it may be hard because maybe he has a reason that we may not even know of for doing this that he sees proper to help our marriage grow.

And I would not say we had to get married. I guess that is what it may look like to you from what I have said. Of course my pregnancy did speed up the process, but I always did know that I wanted to marry my husband and he has always felt the same about me.

I guess the preist just wants to make sure this is what we really want. Believe me this is truely what we both want.

I mean I guess it is hard for you to know about our relationship because you are only going by what I type, but I surely don’t want people to think that we were just two people who had sex and oh I got pregnant so lets get married cause it was not like that. But I guess everyone is entitled to have their opinion on this.

I know that things will get better and in the end everything happens for a reason so this may stregnthen our marriage more than I could ever imagine.

Thanks to everyone for the advice and keep on praying for us as we will be praying also.

God Bless, Kerri

 

[Joan_M]

Kerri,

Please remember that on any of these forums most of what you are getting is personal opinion, tainted by personal quirks and, sometimes, ignorance.

Your priest is totally right. The fact that you got “married” when you found you were pregnant is important - even if you had got married in the Catholic Church, if your marriage failed later, the reason for marrying at the time you did would be considered as a possible grounds for nullity. In other words, getting married just because you are pregnant does not make for proper consent.

Secondly, getting married outside the Church means that you are, in fact, not married, and, therefore, having sex with your “husband” is the sin of fornication.

You clearly need the six months of pre-marital counseling, since you had no idea of the meaning of marriage. That’s what pre-cana courses are all about - trying to ensure valid marriages.

These statements may seem harsh to you, but they are not intended to be harsh - just a clear statement of the truth.

The priest is not allowing you to set a firm date for marriage yet, because you do not have the right to be married, and he needs to make sure that both of you clearly understand the meaning of marriage.

If he does not do this, and later your marriage breaks down, he would have contributed to that breakdown.

You must do your utmost to live like brother and sister for whatever time it takes. If you do not, you will be committing sin. Too many people think - oh, we just have to not receive Communion. Why do you think this is? Because you will be living in a state of mortal sin. Now, we cannot judge the extent of your culpability - only God can do that - but, living a married life when you, truly, are not married, is seriously sinful. That is why you should not receive Communion - if you did, you would be adding the sin of sacrilege to the sins of fornication.

So - it is difficult. Very difficult. But that is what God wants you to do to rectify your situation.

And - do not listen to what “Justsomeguy” is telling you - he is totally wrong. You do not have any marriage bond now. You will only have that after you receive the Sacrament of Matrimony.

Hang in there. It is worth it.

 

[km112482]

Joan M:

Kerri,

Please remember that on any of these forums most of what you are getting is personal opinion, tainted by personal quirks and, sometimes, ignorance.

Your priest is totally right. The fact that you got “married” when you found you were pregnant is important - even if you had got married in the Catholic Church, if your marriage failed later, the reason for marrying at the time you did would be considered as a possible grounds for nullity. In other words, getting married just because you are pregnant does not make for proper consent.

Secondly, getting married outside the Church means that you are, in fact, not married, and, therefore, having sex with your “husband” is the sin of fornication.

You clearly need the six months of pre-marital counseling, since you had no idea of the meaning of marriage. That’s what pre-cana courses are all about - trying to ensure valid marriages.

These statements may seem harsh to you, but they are not intended to be harsh - just a clear statement of the truth.

The priest is not allowing you to set a firm date for marriage yet, because you do not have the right to be married, and he needs to make sure that both of you clearly understand the meaning of marriage.

If he does not do this, and later your marriage breaks down, he would have contributed to that breakdown.

You must do your utmost to live like brother and sister for whatever time it takes. If you do not, you will be committing sin. Too many people think - oh, we just have to not receive Communion. Why do you think this is? Because you will be living in a state of mortal sin. Now, we cannot judge the extent of your culpability - only God can do that - but, living a married life when you, truly, are not married, is seriously sinful. That is why you should not receive Communion - if you did, you would be adding the sin of sacrilege to the sins of fornication.

So - it is difficult. Very difficult. But that is what God wants you to do to rectify your situation.

And - do not listen to what “Justsomeguy” is telling you - he is totally wrong. You do not have any marriage bond now. You will only have that after you receive the Sacrament of Matrimony.

Hang in there. It is worth it.

Thanks for the advice.

I just want it to be made clear that eventhough the process of our marriage was speeded up by me being pregnant does not mean that I was not in love with my husband or that I have no clue what the meaning of marriage is. I know you arent trying to be mean, but that is not the case. I am not trying to start a debate either I just want everyone on here to realize that I do love my husband and we do have a strong bond and as we grow in our faith we do want to invite God into that bond which is something we should have done in the first place. But I surely dont want to be made to feel as though our marriage did not mean a thing.

God Bless, Kerri

 

[Almeria]

km112482:

Thanks for the advice.

I just want it to be made clear that eventhough the process of our marriage was speeded up by me being pregnant does not mean that I was not in love with my husband or that I have no clue what the meaning of marriage is. I know you arent trying to be mean, but that is not the case. I am not trying to start a debate either I just want everyone on here to realize that I do love my husband and we do have a strong bond and as we grow in our faith we do want to invite God into that bond which is something we should have done in the first place. But I surely dont want to be made to feel as though our marriage did not mean a thing.

God Bless, Kerri

I understand, and know what you mean. I had a couple of friends in college who loved each other dearly, and were engaged. One night before they were married they gave into temptation and made love, and as a result she was 3 months pregnant when the wedding took place. Just because she was pregnant doesn’t mean they didn’t love each other and understand what the concept of a Catholic marriage was–it just meant they were human and sinned. Their son was one of the most beautiful children I have ever seen, and they loved him so much.

You’ll be in my prayers!

 

[km112482]

Almeria:

I understand, and know what you mean. I had a couple of friends in college who loved each other dearly, and were engaged. One night before they were married they gave into temptation and made love, and as a result she was 3 months pregnant when the wedding took place. Just because she was pregnant doesn’t mean they didn’t love each other and understand what the concept of a Catholic marriage was–it just meant they were human and sinned. Their son was one of the most beautiful children I have ever seen, and they loved him so much.

You’ll be in my prayers!

Thanks so much for your prayers.
God Bless,
Kerri