Curious about my former marriage

[Calliope]

I was baptized and raised Catholic. I married in the church at the age of 19 to an Episcopalian. We received dispensation, however I was required to sign a form promising to raise any children in the Catholic Church.

I did not believe the teachings of the church and told the priest who was to preside over the ceremony that I would not sign because I did not intend to raise my children Catholic. He told me that if I did not sign, I could not be married in the church and to make my mother happy and just sign the da** form.

I figured if he didn’t take it seriously, I wasn’t going to make a big deal out of it.

We were married in the church and he officiated.

I’ve always wondered if that affected the validity of the marriage.

I did not have my children baptized nor were they raised Catholic. After 25 years my husband and I divorced.

Another weird thing is that instead of having our best man and maid of honor sign the marriage certificate as witnesses, someone in the church office signed for them! Except they put down the wrong name for one of the witnesses! So basically not only was the certificate forged, but one of the signed witnesses doesn’t exist.

I suppose that might affect the legal status of the marriage rather than the validity as far as the church is concerned.

Just wondering if anyone knows if I was actually married or not. The priest has since passed away. Someone told me he had been removed from his duties a few years after I was married due to his alcoholism.

 

[Annie]

You would probably need to discuss this with a canon lawyer. Call the Tribunal of your diocese.

 

[Calliope]

I’m just curious, it’s not really an issue worth making someone investigate. My ex already remarried and I have no connection with the church.

I live 800 miles away from the diocese where we were married.

 

[1ke]

Neither of the things you mention point to something that would be grounds for nullity. There certainly could be other grounds

Neither failing to keep your promise regarding raising your children in the faith nor the thing with the witnesses indicates invalidity.

 

[joseie]

1.Since there is no case that the marriage did not take place,the witness name etc.is irrelevant now.
2.As per Church records you are married which is a legal proof.Whether or not you subsequently follow what you stated in form is irrelevant

 

[Francis]

I was baptized and raised Catholic. I married in the church at the age of 19 to an Episcopalian. We received dispensation, however I was required to sign a form promising to raise any children in the Catholic Church.

What’s you intention now ,are you a practicing Catholic now ?or do you want to reconcile with the Church ,and repent and come back to Church ? if so that,s well and good

I did not believe the teachings of the church and told the priest who was to preside over the ceremony that I would not sign because I did not intend to raise my children Catholic. He told me that if I did not sign, I could not be married in the church and to make my mother happy and just sign the da** form.

That’s very sad you didn’t regard the teaching of the Catholic Church,anyways at that age probably very impulsive. Remember Jesus sees you heart and the intention,anyways you have finished the formalities thou in your point of view name sack ,but still valid,according to the procedure of the Church.
Canon 112.1.3 the children of those mentioned in numbers 1 and 2 who have not completed their fourteenth year, and likewise in a mixed marriage the children of a catholic party who has lawfully transferred to another ritual Church; on completion of their fourteenth year, however, they may return to the latin Church.

Canon 112.1.2 The practice, however long standing, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of an autonomous ritual Church, does not bring with it membership of that Church.
Your Mother prayed for you and had the faith ,and she also did the best she could in the present circumstances.

I figured if he didn’t take it seriously, I wasn’t going to make a big deal out of it.

Marriage is a sacrament ,not a formality,as you make light if it ,sorry to say that.

 

[Francis]

@Calliope

Continuation

We were married in the church and he officiated.
I’ve always wondered if that affected the validity of the marriage.

No its a valid marriage.

I did not have my children baptized nor were they raised Catholic. After 25 years my husband and I divorced.

You can always repent and plead for God’s mercy ,and encourage them about the Catholic Faith and its teaching God willing they may one day be baptized in the Catholic Church Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow.

Another weird thing is that instead of having our best man and maid of honor sign the marriage certificate as witnesses, someone in the church office signed for them! Except they put down the wrong name for one of the witnesses! So basically not only was the certificate forged, but one of the signed witnesses doesn’t exist.

So out of two witnesses ,at least one is valid ,that is the church office signed for it ok try to find that person.

Except they put down the wrong name for one of the witnesses! So basically not only was the certificate forged, but one of the signed witnesses doesn’t exist.

This is a grievous sin against God and man and against the Church teaching.But here the Church official has signed it ,so one of the witnesses is valid.speak to you parish priest whether this can be rectified and if you still in contacts with them probably they may help you the same persons.

I suppose that might affect the legal status of the marriage rather than the validity as far as the church is concerned.

Only your parish priest can truly assist you to make a proper judgement in your case.

 

[Francis]

@Calliope

Just wondering if anyone knows if I was actually married or not. The priest has since passed away. Someone told me he had been removed from his duties a few years after I was married due to his alcoholism.

Yes Your marriage is valid, one witness is valid Canon 1061.3 An invalid marriage is said to be putative if it has been celebrated in good faith by at least one party. It ceases to be such when both parties become certain of its nullity.
The Church’s Code of Canon Law specifies an “official” witness must request and receive the consent of both parties who wish to marry. This witness is a bishop, priest or deacon assigned to the territory or parish of at least one of the persons (Canon 1108). A commentary on the law adds that two other witnesses must also be present. These may be men or women, and although they need not be Catholic (or even Christian), they must be capable of understanding what is taking place.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, which offers a further reflection: “Since marriage is a state of life in the Church, certainty about it is necessary (hence the obligation to have witnesses); – The public character of the consent protects the ‘I do’ once given and helps the spouses remain faithful to it” (No. 1631). Each wedding guest is a witness; her or his presence signifies a willingness to help the couple live out their commitment to be a sign of the Church should this prove more difficult than on the wedding day.

Finally your parish priest will give you all the necessary official details when you meet him

 

[TechieGuy]

On the civil side, living as married for 25 years and going through the legal process if getting a divorce shows that you guys treated it as a marriage, so even if the forms are suspect, you had a common law marriage.

On the Church side, the signed forms exist and the Priest is dead and so can’t corroborate your story, so as far as they are concerned, you were sacramentally married.

But as you note, since you don’t recognize the claims of The Church and the civil marriage was ended, it is all rather a moot point.

 

[Calliope]

Thank you so much for taking the time to respond and provide all that information. I really appreciate it.

 

[Calliope]

Does the church recognize common law marriage? I know the state no longer does.

My ex could corraborate that the forms were signed under false pretenses, and I did tell a number of people at the time, because I was shocked by the rather careless attitude of the priest.

Pretty much everyone agreed that since the church official didn’t consider it a problem I should make my mother happy.

If I had still refused to sign the form, but married someone who was baptized in the proper form in a civil union, the church would recognize that as a real marriage, right?

 

[His_helpmeet]

No, they wouldn’t recognize that as a valid marriage UNLESS you had a dispensation from canonical form. Catholics are bound by canon law and that requires that we marry in the Church or receive a dispensation to marry outside it. Failure to observe that responsibility means the marriage is de facto invalid.

 

[1ke]

Does the church recognize common law marriage?

Maybe. It would be an individual case by case investigation, regarding non Catholics.

I know the state no longer does.

Depends on which state you are talking about. Many US states recognize common law marriage.

If I had still refused to sign the form, but married someone who was baptized in the proper form in a civil union, the church would recognize that as a real marriage, right?

No, not without a dispensation from Catholic form.

 

[Calliope]

Since my dispensation was granted under false pretenses…would that nullify it? That’s the part that I get stuck on. I signed the form even after telling the priest that I would be signing it under false pretenses, just to make mom happy.

So even though I was married in the Church, does the false pretenses part affect validity?

 

[Calliope]

My state stopped recognizing common law marriage about 15 years ago.

 

[TechieGuy]

Huh, well, does all this have any practical impact on your life going forward?

 

[1ke]

Since my dispensation was granted under false pretenses…would that nullify it? That’s the part that I get stuck on. I signed the form even after telling the priest that I would be signing it under false pretenses, just to make mom happy.

I don’t understand what dispensation you are talking about.

There is no dispensation for mixed marriage, only permission. You indicated you married an Episcopalian, so there is no dispensation in such a case. And lack of permission for mixed marriage does not invalidate marriage, it goes to licety only.

So even though I was married in the Church, does the false pretenses part affect validity?

While I am not a canon lawyer, I would say “no”. Because that promise is not absolute, many people fail to fulfill it, and it does not go directly to marital consent.

 

[Elf01]

@acanonlawyer - could you weigh in here?

 

[acanonlawyer]

@acanonlawyer - could you weigh in here?

Sure. I suppose I’m at about 175 lbs.

It’s possible for a permission (or dispensation, as they used to call it) for a mixed marriage (marriage between a Catholic and baptized, non-Catholic) to be invalidly granted, for one reason or another. I won’t say whether or not the permission/dispensation was invalid in this case.

In any event, this permission/dispensation was (and is) not required for the validity of the marriage. So, even if the permission/dispensation is not granted at all, the marriage would not be invalid because of this alone. Likewise, if the permission/dispensation is invalidly granted, the marriage would not be invalid because of this alone.

As for the issue of witnesses, “canonical form” for marriage requires, at the exchange of consent, the active presence of the priest/deacon as well as the presence of two other witnesses of the event that takes place. Whether or not a certain two people sign a form (or forge a signature or whatever…which is really goofy, to say the least) doesn’t change the underlying, and essential, fact: there were (or were not) at least two witnesses who saw the exchange of consent.

Dan

 

[Calliope]

I don’t think so. I read lots of threads about marriage and hear it talked about on the radio, so I was just curious.