Convalidation Help?

[Vico]

hmmm…we never had to sign or initial any such thing.

Really? I was married for 22 years when we had ours convalidated…and being as the only reason we didn’t get married in the Catholic Church is that I was 8 or so when my parents left…and no one ever explained to us that we had to get married in the Church. So ya…to me…it’s the same marriage…made into a sacrament.

Every diocese has their own forms so it varies. But the canon law is clear.

If you were both baptized then once it exists you have the sacrament. Explained in the canon law:Canon 1055.1 The marriage covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of their whole life, and which of its own very nature is ordered to the well-being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children, has, between the baptised, been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.

Canon 1055.2 Consequently, a valid marriage contract cannot exist between baptised persons without its being by that very fact a sacrament.

It actually began only when the Church approved it:Canon 1108.1 Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists, in accordance however with the rules set out in the following canons, and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. 144, 1112.1, 1116 and 1127.2-3.

Simple Convalidation: New consent is given.

Retroactive Convalidation uses original consent where it perdues:

Canon 1161.1 The retroactive validation of an invalid marriage is its validation without the renewal of consent, granted by the competent authority. It involves a dispensation from an impediment if there is one and from the canonical form if it had not been observed, as well as a referral back to the past of the canonical effects.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Every diocese has their own forms so it varies. But the canon law is clear.

If you were both baptized then once it exists you have the sacrament. Explained in the canon law:Canon 1055.1 The marriage covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of their whole life, and which of its own very nature is ordered to the well-being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children, has, between the baptised, been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.

Canon 1055.2 Consequently, a valid marriage contract cannot exist between baptised persons without its being by that very fact a sacrament.

It actually began only when the Church approved it:Canon 1108.1 Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists, in accordance however with the rules set out in the following canons, and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. 144, 1112.1, 1116 and 1127.2-3.

Simple Convalidation: New consent is given.

Retroactive Convalidation uses original consent where it perdues:

Canon 1161.1 The retroactive validation of an invalid marriage is its validation without the renewal of consent, granted by the competent authority. It involves a dispensation from an impediment if there is one and from the canonical form if it had not been observed, as well as a referral back to the past of the canonical effects.

Blah, Blah, Blah…

I highly doubt that Jesus would say that. Yes, I’ve had people tell me I can’t celebrate our original wedding date and anniversary…to which I say HOG WASH!

I don’t think Jesus at the end of my life is going to say…I don’t care that you were put into protective custody from your parents and therefore did not know the rules…That you were only married to each other…it doesn’t count.–Seriously? And my priest would not say that Cause here’s the thing…at almost 25 years…we have a longer/stronger marriage then Catholics who knew the rules and were married in the Church. I’m certainly not going to say…oh well, we have only been married…almost three years now. So if that makes me a cafeteria Catholic–then so be it.

When people do the best they can…and aren’t trying to get around something…I think God knows your heart. This happened long before the information age…or the internet-its not like you could go look these things up.

And for that matter, in this case (the OP)…just because it is there “first” wedding (or whatever) that it needs to be an extravagent affair…

 

[Vico]

Blah, Blah, Blah…

I highly doubt that Jesus would say that. Yes, I’ve had people tell me I can’t celebrate our original wedding date and anniversary…to which I say HOG WASH!

I don’t think Jesus at the end of my life is going to say…I don’t care that you were put into protective custody from your parents and therefore did not know the rules…That you were only married to each other…it doesn’t count.–Seriously? And my priest would not say that Cause here’s the thing…at almost 25 years…we have a longer/stronger marriage then Catholics who knew the rules and were married in the Church. I’m certainly not going to say…oh well, we have only been married…almost three years now. So if that makes me a cafeteria Catholic–then so be it.

When people do the best they can…and aren’t trying to get around something…I think God knows your heart. This happened long before the information age…or the internet-its not like you could go look these things up.

And for that matter, in this case (the OP)…just because it is there “first” wedding (or whatever) that it needs to be an extravagent affair…

That post is not a condemnation or judgment of you or your husband in any way. It is only a statement of fact that matrimony, for a Catholic, is not valid without the approval of the Church. Historically it means there was a civil marriage at one time and a Catholic sacrament of matrimony later.