Dating a divorced Catholic (who was civilly married)

[Ana_v]

What is a reasonable and prudent way of dealing with the following situation?

I know that there are cases where a marriage is “presumptively invalid”, but I also know that it is the perogative of the tribunals to declare a marriage to be null, not the judgment of an individual Catholic.

…

You meet a person who you connect well with, there is mutual attraction, flirting, etc. and you begin to spend time together. As you’re learning about eachother lives, the person tells you he’s divorced.

You don’t yet want to probe for all the relevant details (since you are still getting to know eachother and a divorce is a very personal subject), but as a Catholic you want to have sufficient information to guage and get a sense of what you’re dealing with in order to make the right choices.

The little information you have is that this person was raised nominally Catholic, was civilly married when he was very young, and his marriage with the woman was for the purpose of facilitating her immigration status in the USA. They intended divorce, stayed together for longer than they originally planned because they attempted to “make it work”, but ended up divorcing.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

What is a reasonable and prudent way of dealing with the following situation?

I know that there are cases where a marriage is “presumptively invalid”, but I also know that it is the perogative of the tribunals to declare a marriage to be null, not the judgment of an individual Catholic.

…

You meet a person who you connect well with, there is mutual attraction, flirting, etc. and you begin to spend time together. As you’re learning about eachother lives, the person tells you he’s divorced.

You don’t yet want to probe for all the relevant details (since you are still getting to know eachother and a divorce is a very personal subject), but as a Catholic you want to have sufficient information to guage and get a sense of what you’re dealing with in order to make the right choices.

The little information you have is that this person was raised nominally Catholic, was civilly married when he was very young, and his marriage with the woman was for the purpose of facilitating her immigration status in the USA. They intended divorce, stayed together for longer than they originally planned because they attempted to “make it work”, but ended up divorcing.

The fact that they were civilly married, and that he is a baptized Catholic, makes the civil marriage ipso facto invalid. It is up to this man, to approach his diocesan tribunal, present the evidence, and have his civil marriage declared invalid.

If the two of you are clearly interested in one another, you might bring this up and see what he thinks about it. If he does not see the matter as important, I would seriously question whether it is a good idea to pursue the relationship any further.

 

[whatistrue]

What is a reasonable and prudent way of dealing with the following situation?

Offhand I would probably say something like: “If you are canonically Catholic and hope one day to marry in the Church, you should consider having this prior marriage investigated for validity now, whether for ‘lack of form’ or some other grounds. I urge you to approach your priest for advice and to start this process.”

In other words, treat it as something that affects him and his future without presuming that such future must necessarily include you. And if it turns out that he doesn’t care about being able to marry in the Church, that is an answer also.

 

[Gorgias]

Offhand I would probably say something like: “If you are canonically Catholic and hope one day to marry in the Church, you should consider having this prior marriage investigated for validity now, whether for ‘lack of form’ or some other grounds. I urge you to approach your priest for advice and to start this process.”

Or, perhaps more accurately for @Ana_v: “I’m Catholic and hope one day to marry in the Church, so my fiance – if divorced – would need to have his freedom to marry asserted by the Church.”

If he’s not so interested in that, then that speaks volumes…

 

[whatistrue]

I was trying to avoid even the hint of her statement being about her but clearly entirely about him. Maybe edit to something like “…marry in the Church, as I do, you should…” to let him know that is her position without giving him reason to think that she assumes they will end up together.

 

[Ana_v]

In other words, treat it as something that affects him and his future without presuming that such future must necessarily include you. And if it turns out that he doesn’t care about being able to marry in the Church, that is an answer also.

I would generally opt for a practicing Catholic to avoid precisely these sorts of situations. But, the way we met was very natural and it was his capacity for rational thought that intrigued me.

We met in the dining area of a hostel. I am living abroad at the moment and was traveling to another city one weekend. I was sitting at the dining table in the morning trying to locate on a map where to go out go out later that evening. He and another girl from the hostel were engaged in a long and intriguing conversation about religion. I was overhearing it all with great interest. She was a Buddhist and former Catholic and the way he responded to her indicated he had a above average grasp of philosophical terminology. It was in that conversation that I heard him mention his Catholic upbringing, though he wasn’t religious now except for actively reading the Qu’ran out of interest. When they talked about dualism, she denied distinction between things, and stood by the view that all things are one.

That caused him to ask her a series of questions and that’s why they had so much back and forth.

Some of the things I overheard him say (and wrote in my little notepad as I heard it, because I was that captivated):

“Buddhism is dangerous because it eliminates mental barriers”

"What do you mean there isn’t a heirarchy in animals? Predators and prey. "

“You are not Buddhist, you are animist.”

When they talked about God, she described the universe and everything in it as being God, rather than God as First Cause, Creator, etc.

What intrigued me is that he would counter with very specific questions or objections, but she would answer more or less vaguely.

At one point, he asked her questions about evil and suffering.

She responded: “I can’t answer those questions, you are asking God questions.”

He said: "But you are God [you say] "

Sorry if I digressed. Just wanted to give a little background. I was very intrigued by the
conversation but didn’t want to interject. I went about my morning on my own after that. Later that evening, before going back out, I was again in the common dining area, reviewing my map, and he was sitting nearby by himself. He asked me where I was trying to go and offered to come with me since he was about to head out to eat and because he previously lived in that city (the one I was visiting) for three years and knew it well.

So, that’s how the story began. We ended up going to eat together that evening and had a very enjoyable conversation. A guy with whom I have intellectual compatibility with is few and far between for me.

We aren’t dating, we are friends,
but I posed the question in the event that our interest takes us in that direction in the future.

 

[Bluebright]

What’s more concerning is the fact that religion and the practice of it hasn’t come up in your ‘spending time together’. If he is a practicing catholic then he would be at least considering himself taking care of this (likely he’d just need a statement of form which his parish priest could sort out via the Bishop for him - if it is as you said a civil marriage) now that he’s met someone where it has at least dawned on him that marriage is possible in the future. Do you not speak of attending mass or any of these things? or is he currently not practising which may be a bigger issue than the tiny issue of this letter. I’d suggest talking about how important your faith is to you and then seeing where the discussion goes from there, not that you need to have the marriage discussion, but just that he knows your faith is important to you. God bless

Oh I see the above… I still suggest you make it known how important your faith is to you.

 

[whatistrue]

We aren’t dating, we are friends,
but I posed the question in the event that our interest takes us in that direction in the future.

Thanks for this. Now may not be the right time for that conversation, but I would make sure that your position on marriage and Church (in general; not specifically with respect to him) is known before it becomes difficult to back away if that is what is indicated.

I’d suggest talking about how important your faith is to you and then seeing where the discussion goes from there, not that you need to have the marriage discussion, but just that he knows your faith is important to you.

And while I was drafting this a better phrasing came along.

 

[fredystairs]

They intended divorce,

There is this. If the parties did not intend on a life long marriage at the time they entered into the marriage, but rather they were just going through the motions for the immigration requirements then I would think that this would be another reason that the marriage could be declared invalid, in addition to the problem with the form.

Not knowing the full situation, I hesitate to add the following: if the party you’re interested in did this, does he understand the depth of commitment necessary to enter into a life long union? Does he understand the requirements that the Church holds for marriage? Like no contraception, being open to children, etc? Or does he have a flippant attitude towards marriage? I would think that will need to be discussed in depth. Again I do not have the full information here, so I apologize if I’m out of line with these comments.

I will pray for you and your situation.

Pax

 

[phil19034]

We aren’t dating, we are friends,
but I posed the question in the event that our interest takes us in that direction in the future.

If you are still just friends… start by talking about your Catholic faith. Then, some time after you have been talking about it, casually mention that it is extremely important for you to marry inside the Church so your future husband would need to be able to do that.

That way, it’s out in the open. If you do start to pursue a relationship, you can then remind him of what you said and ask him to receive an annulment before you go any further.

NOTE: he might be under the impression that an annulment is a long, tedious process. Let him know (when it comes to that) his situation should be pretty straightforward (assuming what you told us is correct)

 

[Gorgias]

Let him know (when it comes to that) his situation should be pretty straightforward (assuming what you told us is correct)

Like as in, “fill out a form, submit it, and hear back in a few months; no muss, no fuss, (generally) no cost… and that’s all there is to it!”

(Again, to @phil19034’s point: this presumes that the entirety of his situation is (1) married only once, (2) without a dispensation from the Church, (3) civilly divorced, etc, etc.)

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Like as in, “fill out a form, submit it, and hear back in a few months; no muss, no fuss, (generally) no cost… and that’s all there is to it!”

But even for a lack of form declaration, don’t you have to submit supporting documentation, such as a marriage license to prove that a marriage even took place, and that the celebrant was someone excluded by canonical form (such as a justice of the peace or Protestant minister)?

I don’t think you can just say “I, John Smith, married Sally Jones before justice of the peace Mary N. Gowell (or the Reverend Ewell B. Sawrey) on February 14, 2015 in Gretna Green, Virginia”. You have to have documentation. (What is done when documentation cannot be had, I don’t know.)

 

[Gorgias]

But even for a lack of form declaration, don’t you have to submit supporting documentation, such as a marriage license to prove that a marriage even took place, and that the celebrant was someone excluded by canonical form (such as a justice of the peace or Protestant minister)?

True dat. OK – two steps: get proof of marriage and divorce, then file the paperwork.

(Still, that’s a whole lot different than the usual connotation of what “annulment” entails…)

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

But even for a lack of form declaration, don’t you have to submit supporting documentation, such as a marriage license to prove that a marriage even took place, and that the celebrant was someone excluded by canonical form (such as a justice of the peace or Protestant minister)?

True dat. OK – two steps: get proof of marriage and divorce, then file the paperwork.

(Still, that’s a whole lot different than the usual connotation of what “annulment” entails…)

It is much different. In fact, some here have said that lack of form declarations are not “annulments” at all. I hear what they are saying, and I suppose that technically they’re correct, but I still find the distinction just a little pedantic. I would say that for 99.5% of people who either go for lack of form or seek a declaration of nullity, all they are thinking is, “how soon can I get freed up to marry validly (or to convalidate my existing second marriage as the case may be)?”.

Prior to the past 40-50 years or so, declarations of nullity were very rare birds, much more so if the only reason being advanced were something nebulous such as “grave force or fear” or “psychological immaturity”. The thinking was “you married validly before a priest in a church, and you had no canonical impediments, so that’s it, you two are married”.

 

[runningdude]

We aren’t dating, we are friends,
but I posed the question in the event that our interest takes us in that direction in the future.

In general, if you move from friendship to dating, you will have already gotten the first date chit chat stuff out of the way and have an idea where you stand on major issues. If you choose to date, it should be intentional, and you should discuss boundaries and non-negotiables. The conversation might be awkward, but relationships are inheritantly awkward, and being willing to discuss difficult topics is part of being in one.

 

[JulianN]

I suppose that technically they’re correct, but I still find the distinction just a little pedantic.

It may seem simply technical, but in some countries, it’s a little more than that. While the Tribunal handles these administrative situations in the U.S., that is not true everywhere. Often, this is within the purview of the parish priest.

 

[TheLittleLady]

You have a frank conversation before you decide to fall in love. This is when he speaks to his pastor and asks to have his marriage reviewed. Don’t risk heartbreak if it ends up he is not free to marry.

 

[Ana_v]

I remember reading that a case involving lack of form is much easier to handle than cases where the marriage ceremony was canonical, as commenters here have confirmed.

But since I have never been in a situaiton before of weighing the possibility of dating a divorced person, I am not familiar with the practical steps.

For example, is the first step to simply approach the parish priest?

We are both living abroad, same country but different cities. His marriage took place on the USA. I assume he would either need to do this in the USA. Or, if not strictly required to complete the process in the USA, that it nevertheless makes the process easier if done there.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

I suppose that technically they’re correct, but I still find the distinction just a little pedantic.

It may seem simply technical, but in some countries, it’s a little more than that. While the Tribunal handles these administrative situations in the U.S., that is not true everywhere. Often, this is within the purview of the parish priest.

I did not know this. I thought the procedure was the same everywhere.

Are you saying that, in some countries, lack of form verifications do not ever see a tribunal, but are rather done solely at the parish level, as a mere administrative matter?

And please clarify for me — is a parish priest ever empowered to make a final judgment on the invalidity of a canonical-form Catholic marriage? Or does that always require a declaration of nullity from the bishop or his deputies (i.e., tribunal)?

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

The little information you have is that this person was raised nominally Catholic, was civilly married when he was very young, and his marriage with the woman was for the purpose of facilitating her immigration status in the USA. They intended divorce, stayed together for longer than they originally planned because they attempted to “make it work”, but ended up divorcing.

That kind of behavior doesn’t sound compatible with someone who wants to sincerely live as a Catholic.