Convalidate Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter celamore1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you read the entirety of the canons before and after, there are at least a half dozen explicitly stating that mere errors of understanding do not negate consent.

I’ll quote a representative handful:
Can. 1099 Error concerning the unity or indissolubility or sacramental dignity of marriage does not vitiate matrimonial consent provided that it does not determine the will.

Can. 1100 The knowledge or opinion of the nullity of a marriage does not necessarily exclude matrimonial consent.

Can. 1101 §1. The internal consent of the mind is presumed to conform to the words and signs used in celebrating the marriage.

§2. If, however, either or both of the parties by a positive act of the will exclude marriage itself, some essential element of marriage, or some essential property of marriage, the party contracts invalidly.
Click to expand...
From Canon 1099, not understanding marriage to be a sacrament is not sufficient to block consent. From 1100, an opinion regarding the nullity (and thus an opinion of the lack of nullity) is not itself enough to invalidate a marriage attempt. From 1101,1&2, a marriage of proper form is presumed valid; in the the particular matter, one would have to prove a deliberate withholding of the intent to correct any error in the prior marriage attempt for the convalidation to be invalid.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure why this is addressed to me… I do not dispute that convalidation was necessary, only that a mistaken belief that the convalidation were a mere formality would rather the convalidation attempt invalid.
 
I’m sorry; I don’t understand. Your post made it sound as if this situation involved a misunderstanding of paperwork. It didn’t.
 
Last edited:
The thread is asking about the missing marriage certificate from the parish - paperwork proving the ceremony took place!
 
I suggest you acquire a credible canon law companion book. You’re clearly applying various unrelated canons not germane to the scenario discussed. Why? I have no idea. Perhaps the motive is merely to argue.
 
No, it’s not. The OP asked if the paperwork was a formality since they’d been through a civil wedding ceremony 25 years ago and were “already married.”

Posters are simply clarifying that they were not “already married.” They got married for the first time at their convalidation ceremony.
 
Called the parish today that married us our “Marriage Certificate” was sitting in their office. They mailed it today and we will received it any day now. They were thought we will picking it up that’s why they don’t mailed it to us Me and my husband thought were not getting anything, it just a formality since we already married but I’m glad I asked in this forum and find out we supposed to have one. “Thank you all” Honestly I never heard that Convalidate marriage till we heard that from the priest. He said even were married 25 years you can’t renew your vows in the church since you’re not married in the Church .And since this is not our first marriage were already married, Pretty much all we need is just the blessing from the church. Before we get married in church we do like a newly wed we submit everything… our civil marriage certificate, baptismal, birth certificate, confirmation certificate , confession, got separate interviewed by the priest had wedding seminar it take us almost a year before we complete all they needs. and we had our wedding day exactly the day when we had our first wedding and we marked our 25th Wedding Anniversary the day in our wedding day. so it be Nov 1992-2017…and we glad we did coz its worted
 
Last edited:
I was referring to the marriage certificate as paperwork. The OP asked if she should have received a copy. I stated only that asking if she should have gotten paperwork is not evidence of defective understanding that would render her convalidation invalid.

Her original civil marriage attempt would of course be invalid if the couple were bound to canonical form.
 
Last edited:
Thanks they have it just sitting in their office they thought were going to picking it up they just mailed today we can have it any day now
 
Sounds like there’s a great deal of confusion at your parish about what "Convalidation is. Convalidation is most certainly not a renewal of vows or a formality or a blessing of an invalid marriage. Indeed, Catholics, married only civilly, are not actually married as the marriage is invalid and not recognized by the Catholic Church. Therefore, Catholics who attempt marriage civilly and then live together commit grave sin. Only separation or a real marriage in the Catholic Church resolves this. That is the only purpose of Convalidation.

Unfortunately, many priests and pastoral ministers, afraid of being seen as judgemental, shy away from telling Catholics in invalid civil marriages actually what the Church teaches. Many, then, are falsely lead to Convalidation believing they’ve been married all along and that the Convalidation is merely a “Formality.”

Since such a belief that this is not the true wedding, but a formality, can lead to defective consent during the Convalidation, it can cause that wedding to also be invalid. It begs the question. If a couple says in their own minds, "We’re already married and don’t really need this," or “Our first wedding was the real wedding.” then how can they intend to marry one another through the vows at their Catholic wedding? Are they not rather reciting them, without true intention, as a formality? I think this is quite unfortunate considering how easy it is to simply tell people the truth about why they’re being asked to marry in the Church.
 
Last edited:
TheOldColonel said:
Indeed, Catholics, married only civilly, are not actually married as the marriage is invalid and not recognized by the Catholic Church. Therefore, Catholics who attempt marriage civilly and then live together commit grave sin. Only separation or a real marriage in the Catholic Church resolves this.
Click to expand...
Would this cover a civil marriage with one Catholic, where you have dispension due to mixed faiths?
 
I’m not sure what you’re asking. Could you be more specific?
 
Last edited:
If a Catholic marries a Christian of another denomination, they need permission from their diocese for it to be a licit marriage, did I get that right?

The follow-up question I asked was: can such a marriage be civil/non-religious? (Or does it need to be celebrated within the rite of either bride or groom?)
 
  1. For a Catholic to marry another non-Catholic Christian, yes they need to get permission. I believe that permission is granted, assuming that the wedding will be in a Catholic church.
  2. From there another form of permission can be sought to be allowed to be marry in the non-Catholic’s church. I would assume it’s pretty rare that this permission will be granted for a “civil” wedding.
 
Gorgias said:
If one was unbaptized, then the marriage became valid at the time of the unbaptized spouse’s baptism, so… no convalidation.
Click to expand...
I just re-read what I wrote, and I mis-spoke. But, for some reason, I can’t go back and edit my post. So, let me correct myself:

if one spouse was unbaptized, that doesn’t make the marriage invalid. And, once the spouse did get baptized, the marriage automatically became a sacramental marriage at that moment.

Sorry for the bad info… 😉
 
Permission for Mixed Religion Marriage must be granted by the Catholic party’s bishop. The marriage must take place within the Roman Rite (with priest or deacon and two witnesses) in the sacred space of the Catholic Church unless a Dispensation from Canonical Form is also granted. The one preparing the couple for marriage arranges for this when preparing the Nuptial File. The normal practice, if Dispensation from Canonical Form is obtained, is for the wedding to take place at the non-Catholic’s church with his minister. The marriage, nevertheless, is recorded in the Catholic party’s parish sacramental register for Matrimony with all details. The Nuptial File also remains at the Catholic parish. Requesting Dispensation from Canonical Form for a non-religious wedding would not likely be granted. Indeed, any bishop would question the motive of the couple in trying to avoid a religious wedding, especially between two baptized people.
 
Last edited:
Got it our (Marriage Certificate)I had to called them they thought were picking it up so it was sitting there all along. I’m glad I did asked in this forum. Thanks
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top