Dating before annulment is granted?

[Bhaoirluin]

What is the Catholic Church’s stance on whether or not a person can date other people if they are civilly divorced and have applied for an annulment, but have not yet got an annulment granted? An annulment, if eventually granted, can easily take two or three years to go through, and I’d guess a lot of people would find it helpful to know whether during this length of time they are free to go out and date people. Obviously, you are not free to contract a new marriage until after your first marriage has been granted the decree of nullity, because your marriage is presumed valid unless proven otherwise. However, is a person awaiting an annulment decision required to behave exactly as a happily married person would, or are they allowed a certain amount of freedom with regards to dating other people and becoming romantically involved with them? If so, what kind of behavior would be considered acceptable?

I look forward to your replies .

 

[BettyBoop416]

I look forward to your replies .

Yeah, they’re gonna be good.

 

[bernadettefaith]

My understanding is that civil divorce does not give the freedom to date as the marriage is presumed valid until proven otherwise.

 

[dshix]

What is the Catholic Church’s stance on whether or not a person can date other people if they are civilly divorced and have applied for an annulment, but have not yet got an annulment granted? An annulment, if eventually granted, can easily take two or three years to go through, and I’d guess a lot of people would find it helpful to know whether during this length of time they are free to go out and date people. Obviously, you are not free to contract a new marriage until after your first marriage has been granted the decree of nullity, because your marriage is presumed valid unless proven otherwise. However, is a person awaiting an annulment decision required to behave exactly as a happily married person would, or are they allowed a certain amount of freedom with regards to dating other people and becoming romantically involved with them? If so, what kind of behavior would be considered acceptable?

I look forward to your replies .

Before obtaining an annulment, you are still considered married to your spouse. No exceptions. Thus, if you date or court before obtaining an annulment, you *are *committing adultery.

Making friendships is fine; but if anything romantic occurs, you MUST separate yourself immediately, both to avoid sin and for your mental health if you end up being unable to obtain an annulment.

 

[Corki]

What is the Catholic Church’s stance on whether or not a person can date other people if they are civilly divorced and have applied for an annulment, but have not yet got an annulment granted? An annulment, if eventually granted, can easily take two or three years to go through, and I’d guess a lot of people would find it helpful to know whether during this length of time they are free to go out and date people. Obviously, you are not free to contract a new marriage until after your first marriage has been granted the decree of nullity, because your marriage is presumed valid unless proven otherwise. However, is a person awaiting an annulment decision required to behave exactly as a happily married person would, or are they allowed a certain amount of freedom with regards to dating other people and becoming romantically involved with them? If so, what kind of behavior would be considered acceptable?

I look forward to your replies .

Regarding the bolded: No, they are expected to behave exactly as an UNhappily married person would. They are separated and estranged, not happily married. However, the reason a person can’t marry in this situation is the existence of a prior bond. That bond includes a promise of fidelity. Most moral people would consider dating someone else to be a violation of that promise.

 

[Bhaoirluin]

Thanks for your replies. I realize I didn’t use the best wording. I used the term “happily married”, but I was meaning to refer to any married couple, whether happily or unhappily married, who are still in an ongoing relationship and who have not legally separated. I was wondering if their situation would be any different to a couple who are legally separated and awaiting an annulment decision. It appears from your answers that until the annulment is granted, the rules are the same for everyone. That a person is not free to date or enter into any romantic relationship with anyone other than their existing spouse.

 

[dshix]

I was wondering if their situation would be any different to a couple who are legally separated and awaiting an annulment decision. It appears from your answers that until the annulment is granted, the rules are the same for everyone. That a person is not free to date or enter into any romantic relationship with anyone other than their existing spouse.

Yes, you are correct.

This makes sense from a practical standpoint as well; if a woman in the process of waiting for an annulment dates and falls in love with another man, and then the annulment is denied (that is, the Church decides that the previous marriage was valid) then there she is, left in love with but unable to marry another man. It’s quite emotionally damaging, and evidence of this heartbreak can be seen on many threads here on CAF.

 

[Joe_5859]

Thanks for your replies. I realize I didn’t use the best wording. I used the term “happily married”, but I was meaning to refer to any married couple, whether happily or unhappily married, who are still in an ongoing relationship and who have not legally separated. I was wondering if their situation would be any different to a couple who are legally separated and awaiting an annulment decision. It appears from your answers that until the annulment is granted, the rules are the same for everyone. That a person is not free to date or enter into any romantic relationship with anyone other than their existing spouse.

For there to be different “rules”, that would require the Church to basically offer some sort of preliminary “Your-annulment-will-probably-go-through” stamp of approval, which would definitely confuse people and probably not work out that well.

Different people have different definitions of “dating.” I’ve known people in those situations who cultivated “friendships” that were basically discerning marriage if that option became available. And they were ready to talk away if the annulment was not granted. That’s a very dangerous spot to put yourself in, though.

 

[thewanderer]

I’ve been wondering a similar question. While I realize for most forms of annulment one can never be sure they will be granted an annulment and so must act as though they are married whether or not they are, is there a difference for those who only need a lack of form annulment? They know for certain that their marriage was not valid and that they will be granted an annulment as that kind of case is very easy to be certain about. Because of this would it be permissable for such people to date while waiting for their lack of form annulment to come through?

 

[Corki]

I’ve been wondering a similar question. While I realize for most forms of annulment one can never be sure they will be granted an annulment and so must act as though they are married whether or not they are, is there a difference for those who only need a lack of form annulment? They know for certain that their marriage was not valid and that they will be granted an annulment as that kind of case is very easy to be certain about. Because of this would it be permissable for such people to date while waiting for their lack of form annulment to come through?

I think so. In a lack of form case, there is not the “presumption of validity” so there is no issue of a prior bond.

This is probably something that should be discussed with the priest, possibly as part of confessing to simulating the Sacrament. (technical jargon for invalid marriage)

 

[fontgoddess]

As a person who met my husband before his decree of nullity was granted, I would take issue with people calling our relationship (which was chaste) adultery. We met and became friends but it quickly became apparent that we had romantic feelings towards each other, too. One of our strongest connections was our commitment to our faith. He was a recent convert and I a recent revert. We were committed to chastity and to walking away if the annulment was not granted. Of course it is easy to say that, but it would have been hard to do. One thing that made it easier is that we lived across the country from each other and could only afford to visit once or twice a year. We got to know each other via email and iChat, without being too distracted by physical attraction! If we had lived in the same city, it might not have worked out so well. Also, we kept our confessors in the loop and listened to their advice. We did not become engaged until after the decree came down. My story had a happy ending (we’ve been married four years and have two beautiful little boys) but it might have ended very differently, I know. FWIW, my husband was not looking for a relationship at all. It snuck up on both of us. We took a huge risk with our hearts, but we made sure we never did anything we would regret if it turned out we couldn’t be together.

 

[dshix]

As a person who met my husband before his decree of nullity was granted, I would take issue with people calling our relationship (which was chaste) adultery. We met and became friends but it quickly became apparent that we had romantic feelings towards each other, too. One of our strongest connections was our commitment to our faith. He was a recent convert and I a recent revert. We were committed to chastity and to walking away if the annulment was not granted. Of course it is easy to say that, but it would have been hard to do. One thing that made it easier is that we lived across the country from each other and could only afford to visit once or twice a year. We got to know each other via email and iChat, without being too distracted by physical attraction! If we had lived in the same city, it might not have worked out so well. Also, we kept our confessors in the loop and listened to their advice. We did not become engaged until after the decree came down. My story had a happy ending (we’ve been married four years and have two beautiful little boys) but it might have ended very differently, I know. FWIW, my husband was not looking for a relationship at all. It snuck up on both of us. We took a huge risk with our hearts, but we made sure we never did anything we would regret if it turned out we couldn’t be together.

I’m happy for you that you found a good husband.

I understand that you take issue with me calling what your husband did adultery, but my point still stands. He, knowing he was not free to marry, should have not let himself enter an emotional relationship. As it is, things worked out, but the standard of how a Catholic married person should act when still without an annulment stands.

 

[VivienneJ]

As a person who met my husband before his decree of nullity was granted, I would take issue with people calling our relationship (which was chaste) adultery. , My story had a happy ending (we’ve been married four years and have two beautiful little boys) but it might have ended very differently, I know.

Fontgoddess, you’ve been a member here for a long time, but perhaps you have not seen any of the absolutely heartbreaking threads there have been when a couple has started a relationship before getting whatever annulments are needed. It is these situations to which dshix refers here:

This makes sense from a practical standpoint as well; if a woman in the process of waiting for an annulment dates and falls in love with another man, and then the annulment is denied (that is, the Church decides that the previous marriage was valid) then there she is, left in love with but unable to marry another man. It’s quite emotionally damaging, and evidence of this heartbreak can be seen on many threads here on CAF.

I agree with this:

I’m happy for you that you found a good husband.

I understand that you take issue with me calling what your husband did adultery, but my point still stands. He, knowing he was not free to marry, should have not let himself enter an emotional relationship. As it is, things worked out, but the standard of how a Catholic married person should act when still without an annulment stands.

It is encouraging to read of a situation where everything worked out to lead to a happy marriage. For myself no annulment, no relationship, not even as ‘friends’. The ending of a relationship is painful enough when a couple find they just don’t have sufficient commitment to each other, or whatever other reason there may be; but to have to end a relationship because one of the parties is in fact validly married to someone else…I see no good reason for putting oneself into the possibility of a painful situation like that.

 

[fontgoddess]

I’m happy for you that you found a good husband.

I understand that you take issue with me calling what your husband did adultery, but my point still stands. He, knowing he was not free to marry, should have not let himself enter an emotional relationship. As it is, things worked out, but the standard of how a Catholic married person should act when still without an annulment stands.

I hear what you are saying and I would even say that I agree. I wouldn’t recommend a person waiting on an annulment to actively look for a relationship. I’m just saying that it’s not easy, if you happen to meet a really incredible person, to just walk away. Our friendship was and continues to be, an amazing gift. I’m not saying that makes it OK, just that life is complicated and that discernment can be hard! I think I prayed more during that time than I did in my entire life before that. I’m not trying to give advice, really, just sharing my experience in case it helps.

 

[fontgoddess]

Fontgoddess, you’ve been a member here for a long time, but perhaps you have not seen any of the absolutely heartbreaking threads there have been when a couple has started a relationship before getting whatever annulments are needed. It is these situations to which dshix refers here:

I agree with this:

It is encouraging to read of a situation where everything worked out to lead to a happy marriage. For myself no annulment, no relationship, not even as ‘friends’. The ending of a relationship is painful enough when a couple find they just don’t have sufficient commitment to each other, or whatever other reason there may be; but to have to end a relationship because one of the parties is in fact validly married to someone else…I see no good reason for putting oneself into the possibility of a painful situation like that.

I really do agree, and would probably give the same advice as you. As you can probably tell, even though things worked out for us, I’m still a bit uncomfortable with the fact that we did have a relationship, however chaste, while he was still putatively married.

 

[dshix]

I hear what you are saying and I would even say that I agree. I wouldn’t recommend a person waiting on an annulment to actively look for a relationship. I’m just saying that it’s not easy, if you happen to meet a really incredible person, to just walk away. Our friendship was and continues to be, an amazing gift. I’m not saying that makes it OK, just that life is complicated and that discernment can be hard! I think I prayed more during that time than I did in my entire life before that. I’m not trying to give advice, really, just sharing my experience in case it helps.

Ah, but you don’t have to cut yourself off from the world just because you are still considered married by the Church.

When a person who is waiting on an annulment is socializing, and senses that she is falling in love with a person, and vice versa, I think the clearest thing to do is address the problem directly. The person should tell the other person that he/she is unavailable for relationships at the moment, but would like to continue as soon as the annulment is completed.

If the emotional attraction is strong, the two persons should vocally and intentionally decide to separate until the situation is ironed out. This way, the heartbreak of a denied annulment request is averted.

 

[Joe_5859]

As a person who met my husband before his decree of nullity was granted, I would take issue with people calling our relationship (which was chaste) adultery. We met and became friends but it quickly became apparent that we had romantic feelings towards each other, too. One of our strongest connections was our commitment to our faith. He was a recent convert and I a recent revert. We were committed to chastity and to walking away if the annulment was not granted. Of course it is easy to say that, but it would have been hard to do. One thing that made it easier is that we lived across the country from each other and could only afford to visit once or twice a year. We got to know each other via email and iChat, without being too distracted by physical attraction! If we had lived in the same city, it might not have worked out so well. Also, we kept our confessors in the loop and listened to their advice. We did not become engaged until after the decree came down. My story had a happy ending (we’ve been married four years and have two beautiful little boys) but it might have ended very differently, I know. FWIW, my husband was not looking for a relationship at all. It snuck up on both of us. We took a huge risk with our hearts, but we made sure we never did anything we would regret if it turned out we couldn’t be together.

It is interesting because I know a couple who went through something very similar (except it was the woman who was going through the annulment process). It ended up working out for them, too. They were also across the country from each other in the beginning. It makes me wonder if that initial distance was a helpful part of the equation.