Dating during annulment process?

[graceandglory]

The question was answered pretty definitely by Fr. Serpa: No dating prior to annulment.

Margaret

This might have already been stated here, please note, Fr. Serpa was speaking to those who had been previously married in the Catholic Church. His response was to someone who has a marriage “on the books” in the Church, and would require a full annulment to declare otherwise.

My marriage was outside of the Catholic Church, and while I wouldn’t recommend “dating” before an annulment, I was not ever married “in the eyes of the Church.”

That said,
The Church presumes all legal marriages to be valid, I believe.

 

[jmcrae]

My apologies.

I am the child of a divorce. I don’t think parents really have any idea how difficult divorce is, for the children.

Being alone at night, trying to be responsible, because both parents have to work two jobs and there is no money for a babysitter. Thinking that you could get kidnapped, and nobody would ever even realize that you were missing - everyone would just think that you were living at the other parent’s house.

Why would ‘best friends’ do that to their kids?

 

[pnewton]

My apologies.

I am the child of a divorce. I don’t think parents really have any idea how difficult divorce is, for the children.

Why would ‘best friends’ do that to their kids?

Why would anyone. My advice to anybody considering divorce is that there are few things that are more painful. If a marriage is not working out, the divorce won’t either.

 

[Gertabelle]

My apologies.

I am the child of a divorce. I don’t think parents really have any idea how difficult divorce is, for the children.

Being alone at night, trying to be responsible, because both parents have to work two jobs and there is no money for a babysitter. Thinking that you could get kidnapped, and nobody would ever even realize that you were missing - everyone would just think that you were living at the other parent’s house.

Why would ‘best friends’ do that to their kids?

Dear one, what you went through, whether it was typical or not of most divorces, is unthinkable!

It is to avoid putting my son through that experience that my son’s dad and I have created the relationships with each other and our families. I am working two jobs, as well as working on a doctorate in the wee hours of the morning, and my son’s dad has only just gotten one day a week off.

We know where our son is, and with whom, at all times. It’s all about communication. We communicate about our schedules, our needs, our son’s sleep patterns, his favorite toys for the day or the week, his emotional and physical state getting dropped off at his babysitter, and getting picked up. We share stories about his day, funny or beautiful things he’s up to, and milestones in his development.

My ex and I are not “best friends”. And why we got married or divorced, I’m sorry, is not your business. Suffice to say, you see the world through your own horrible experience, but that’s not how all of us live.

My son is beating all the odds of divorced children. And I’ve seen this in some of my students as well, when their divorced parents can behave like adults, and they elicit the support of friends or family to help out with childcare and social support.

Clearly, your family did not have that when you were growing up. But don’t condemn those of us who are able to create, through God’s grace, what your parents couldn’t. I’m not going to destroy my son’s life because you had a hellacious childhood, nor am I going to try to remarry my ex because you don’t understand our divorce.

My ex and I are not your parents, and what we’re creating for our son has nothing to do with you or your past. Our son is a perfectly normal four-year-old and, please God (and with our continued commitment and efforts), he will continue to grow without the pain of divorce normally experienced by children.

So this woman with a decree of nullity will continue to pray to St. Joseph for protection and St. Anne for guidance (Dear St. Anne, send me a man, fast as you can )

Praying for your healing and peace.

Gertie

 

[otjm]

Now it will take some time before the civil divorce is settled. Filing for a civil divorce is necessary for the children. Without a divorce settlement, he could just move away and never send a time to support the children.

Well, at least in Oregon, she could file for temporary custody and temporary support; I would imagine that most states have similar laws.

Technically, the Church will not recognize the divorce, but that does not mean she is married, in the sacramental sense. Even though there was a marriage at the beginning, for circumstances beyond her control, the marriage no longer exists.[/QUOTEThe marriage as a lega relaitonship will continue until a decree. The marriage as an emotional, social and psychological relationship may have already died, or is in the process of dying.
JimR-OCDS;3805877:

I doubt she’ll go for an annulment, until she has support for the kids settled. This could take a year or more, from what I understand.

The Church would not start the hearing for a decree of nullity unless and until a divorce decree has been rendered. It simply will not look at an exisitng marriage to determine whether or not a scarmental union exists; it is presumed by Canon law to exist, and the Church simply won’t question it.

An annulment would take a year or more after that. If some point between now and then, she meets some one, is she, a women of only 33 years of age, to say no to a relationship?

I no the answer here is going to be yes, she has to say no to any relationship with another man, until she gets an annulment.

In my mind, this makes no sense whatsoever.

It is based on what Christ taught us about marriage. althought he reference is different, he also taught his disciples that they must eat His flesh; and the Synoptic writers tell us that many went away. It is not the only thing that He said that doesn’t make any sense to a lot of people; but either He was Who He said He was, or He was a liar. And if He was Who He said He was, then He asks us to accept what He says. And what He says is that Marriage is permanent in the eyes of God.

A Decree of nullity says that there was never a sacrament exisiting, so there never was a marriage. We tend to get things confused, as the State will say there was a marriage, and so will the Federal government (taxes…). It is hard to keep those straight. but there is real meaning in it, and most particularly real meaning about what a marriage is, or is not a marriage. Society has become extremely sloppy about the definition of marriage, even as it only pertains to a man and a woman. One only has to look at Hollywood, with their rotating doors; and society where more and more people are shacking up without even the semblance of a marriage - it is “good enough” for them.

Any way, my wife and myself are heart-sick over this. We always thought they had a solid marriage, and so did my daughter, until he left.

Jim

I don’t doubt you are, and neither do I misunderstand your feelings, nor do I dismiss them or say “You are wrong to feel that way”. I do hope that you can come to understand the richness of what the Church says about marriage, and why it says all that it does, including the issues of a decree of nullity. feelings are an emotional response to a situation. However, what the Church says is not an emotional response, but a deeply and well thought out theological response to what has been revealed to us in Christ.

And it isn’t easy.

 

[rpp]

Unfortunately, I cannot go back and edit at this point. I edited so much as I was writing – this sentence originally said “It’s not as if I’m sleeping…” When I deleted the “It’s not as if” I failed to include that little word “not.”

Well, it’s good for a good laugh!

Thank you for that clarification. It had me wondering…

The sentence structure seemed a bit off so I presumed it was something like that. Besides, I think I know you well enough to know that the word “not” was missing.

 

[Sheeniac]

It is my impression that the powers that be have figured this part out. I really don’t think that the individuals who are our bishops, be they conservative, moderate or liberal, have not figured out that the Church has some significant problems on its hand with the current divorce rates, not to mention the current level of people simply shacking up.

SNIP

So before you berate the Church - the bishops and priests - who are on the firing line trying to get something through the skulls of these people traipsing up to the altar, you might remember that the priest may not see 79% of them more than a couple of times a month maybe, to a few times a year, to not at all.

I believe the previous poster was talking not only about marriage prep, but the annulment process itself. There’s a strong need for more information, accurate and clear, about the teaching on annulments.

Perhaps something could be added to the bulletins once or twice a year, or something sent out with the annual appeals, etc.

My point was that no one should have to find out about it by going to a special workshop on the finer details of the process.

This way - fewer bitter ex-Catholics, fewer confused sinners, etc. In addition - my BF said that at the first annulment info session he went to after his divorce, that there were several women there who already had the wedding dates set. They all left the meeting when they found out that it could take more than a year.

Yes, we’re responsible for finding these things out ourselves. But our shepherds need to give some warnings ahead of time. I’m not putting all of the blame on them, well… I guess it sounds like it based on my posts, but it has to start somewhere. And where else but with the Bishops and Priests. They’re really the ones who have the power…

 

[jmcrae]

They’re really the ones who have the power…

They only have as much power as we give them. Most people insist on learning everything the hard way - there are pamphlet racks and books in every Catholic Church I’ve ever been in, that have all this information, along with other important information about the teachings of the Church, right there, free for the taking - and as far as I can tell, very few people make use of them.

 

[EasterJoy]

Well my daughter is going through the very beginning of a divorce.

Her husband started hitting bars after work, without her knowledge, and he eventually ended up in an affair with a woman who he met at the bar. He up and left, abandoning my daughter and her two children. She did everything she could to get her husband to come back, but he has refused and has stop providing support for her and the children. My daughter was a stay at home mom, so has no income, other than her husbands.

So, she’s going to be speaking with a lawyer this week.

Now it will take some time before the civil divorce is settled. Filing for a civil divorce is necessary for the children. Without a divorce settlement, he could just move away and never send a time to support the children.

Technically, the Church will not recognize the divorce, but that does not mean she is married, in the sacramental sense. Even though there was a marriage at the beginning, for circumstances beyond her control, the marriage no longer exists.

I doubt she’ll go for an annulment, until she has support for the kids settled. This could take a year or more, from what I understand.

An annulment would take a year or more after that. If some point between now and then, she meets some one, is she, a women of only 33 years of age, to say no to a relationship?

I no the answer here is going to be yes, she has to say no to any relationship with another man, until she gets an annulment.

In my mind, this makes no sense whatsoever.

Any way, my wife and myself are heart-sick over this. We always thought they had a solid marriage, and so did my daughter, until he left.

Jim

Quite apart from the canon law aspects, going through a divorce is a really good time to stick to spending time with friends and not starting a new relationship. You are so vulnerable at that time. It is “on the re-bound” times ten. Your needs are profound, but a new partner is probably the last thing you need for some time after.

The children are also at a very vulnerable time. It is extremely important that their mother have social support and a social life, but it would be very wise if she were to avoid anything like a romantic attachment.

The Church does recognize that there is sometimes a need for civil divorce of a valid marriage, when it is necessary for the just division of material goods, the protection of children, and for the sake of peace in the home. Having said that, there is no “the marriage no longer exists.” Although experience can show one or both partners to been incapable of validly entering into a marriage at the time they made their vows, the choice of one partner to sin does not nullify the marriage, even if the choice seems entrenched. As long as both partners are still alive, either the marriage never existed or it still exists. Even when a valid marriage must be subjected to civil divorce to enforce the measure of justice between the parties that the state can provide, the parties remain married in the eyes of the Church.

My heart goes out to your poor daughter, though. Our brothers and sisters who are caught in a situation like that through no fault of their own need all our compassion and support. Every marriage is different; even those who have been in a very similar position can’t be in a position to judge.

 

[Sheeniac]

They only have as much power as we give them. Most people insist on learning everything the hard way - there are pamphlet racks and books in every Catholic Church I’ve ever been in, that have all this information, along with other important information about the teachings of the Church, right there, free for the taking - and as far as I can tell, very few people make use of them.

A better word would have been the authority, not power.

I travel, and I can tell you that there’s nothing in either of the 2 churches in my parish. I’ve attended 3 churches on a regular basis in NYC last year, and nothing there. When I was reverting, I had been to 2 different churches in neighboring parishes. Nothing there. I live in a diocese next to the Archdiocese of Chicago.

I’ve gone to 2 in CA this year. Nothing there.

I went to one in Colorado this year. Nothing there. I will say that there was a special column from the priest in their bulletin about annulments. I was very impressed.

Granted, I’ve only been Home for a little over a year. Perhaps had I visited more churches over the years, I would have seen more of what you have seen.

Count yourself lucky to have information all over the place.

 

[rpp]

Well my daughter is going through the very beginning of a divorce.

Her husband started hitting bars after work, without her knowledge, and he eventually ended up in an affair with a woman who he met at the bar. He up and left, abandoning my daughter and her two children. She did everything she could to get her husband to come back, but he has refused and has stop providing support for her and the children. My daughter was a stay at home mom, so has no income, other than her husbands.

So, she’s going to be speaking with a lawyer this week.

Now it will take some time before the civil divorce is settled. Filing for a civil divorce is necessary for the children. Without a divorce settlement, he could just move away and never send a time to support the children.

Technically, the Church will not recognize the divorce, but that does not mean she is married, in the sacramental sense. Even though there was a marriage at the beginning, for circumstances beyond her control, the marriage no longer exists.

I doubt she’ll go for an annulment, until she has support for the kids settled. This could take a year or more, from what I understand.

An annulment would take a year or more after that. If some point between now and then, she meets some one, is she, a women of only 33 years of age, to say no to a relationship?

I no the answer here is going to be yes, she has to say no to any relationship with another man, until she gets an annulment.

In my mind, this makes no sense whatsoever.

Any way, my wife and myself are heart-sick over this. We always thought they had a solid marriage, and so did my daughter, until he left.

Jim

Jim,

I am very sorry to hear this. I can see how this would make you very unhappy and more than a little troubled.

I have never been very good at offering words of comfort, but I will offer my prayers for your daughter and your entire family.

May God grant all of you His comfort and His peace.

 

[rpp]

After much thought and reflection on this, I have solidified my opinion on this.

When I dated while was awaiting my annulment, I was not merely making a mistake, I was committing the very grave sin of adultery. In addition, this meant that I also received the Body and Blood of our Lord unworthily on countless occasions.

I have much to confess.

Thank you all who contributed hear in helping me to better form my conscience.

 

[EasterJoy]

After much thought and reflection on this, I have solidified my opinion on this.

When I dated while was awaiting my annulment, I was not merely making a mistake, I was committing the very grave sin of adultery. In addition, this meant that I also received the Body and Blood of our Lord unworthily on countless occasions.

I have much to confess.

Thank you all who contributed hear in helping me to better form my conscience.

If it wouldn’t be fornication if you were unmarried, it isn’t adultery if you are married. Dating someone other than your spouse may be infidelity or a serious occasion of impurity–I say “may” because it is of course possible to share dinner out with someone without violating chastity or trust–but not necessarily adultery.

 

[rpp]

If it wouldn’t be fornication if you were unmarried, it isn’t adultery if you are married. Dating someone other than your spouse may be infidelity or a serious occasion of impurity–I say “may” because it is of course possible to share dinner out with someone without violating chastity or trust–but not necessarily adultery.

I was not referring to unchaste behavior. I was referring to pursuing chaste dating or courtship relationships when the status of my marriage was still presumed valid.

A married person is not free to being a romantic relationship, albeit a chaste one, with a person other than their spouse. That is also adultery. Adultery is about more than just sex.

 

[EasterJoy]

I was not referring to unchaste behavior. I was referring to pursuing chaste dating or courtship relationships when the status of my marriage was still presumed valid.

A married person is not free to being a romantic relationship, albeit a chaste one, with a person other than their spouse. That is also adultery. Adultery is about more than just sex.

This is hair-splitting at this point, but I think that it is infidelity that is about more than just sex. Adultery and infidelity are not synonymous.

 

[rpp]

This is hair-splitting at this point, but I think that it is infidelity that is about more than just sex. Adultery and infidelity are not synonymous.

Umm. Which of us is splitting hairs?

 

[otjm]

After much thought and reflection on this, I have solidified my opinion on this.

When I dated while was awaiting my annulment, I was not merely making a mistake, I was committing the very grave sin of adultery. In addition, this meant that I also received the Body and Blood of our Lord unworthily on countless occasions.

I have much to confess.

Thank you all who contributed hear in helping me to better form my conscience.

(Sigh). Time for Sacraments 101 again.

3 things are necessary for something to be a mortal sin: 1) it must be serious; 2) you must know that it is serious and 3) you must will the act.

So far, you have only indicated that one of the conditions were fulfilled; you willed the act.

Depending on how one defines “dating”, you may or may not have fulfilled the second qualififcation - the first. However, by your own statements it appears that you did not know the matter was serious, so no mortal sin, and nothing to confess.

If it makes yopu feel better, you are certainly welcome to bring it up in confession, but be careful of not going off on a tangent of scrupulosity. Move forward; don’t get caught in a downdraft of revisiting everything you have done in the light of new information.

 

[EasterJoy]

Umm. Which of us is splitting hairs?

This has to be either/or?

Seriously, though, if you confess “adultery”, that has a particular meaning that infidelity does not. You can violate trust or violate vows without violating chastity, but you can’t commit adultery and yet remain chaste.

I don’t want to say that what you did is OK or should not be brought up with your confessor, but if you were not unchaste even in thought, you did not commit adultery.

 

[Just_Lurking]

This is hair-splitting at this point, but I think that it is infidelity that is about more than just sex. Adultery and infidelity are not synonymous.

Canon lawyers have a definition of adultery that they use in the application of canon 1152, separation due to adultery. The definition includes actual sex acts, both natural and unnatural, but it is not so broad as to include non-adulterous forms of infidelity. For example, it does not include cyber sex, phone sex, pornography, masturbation, emotional affairs, etc.

 

[whatevergirl]

After much thought and reflection on this, I have solidified my opinion on this.

When I dated while was awaiting my annulment, I was not merely making a mistake, I was committing the very grave sin of adultery. In addition, this meant that I also received the Body and Blood of our Lord unworthily on countless occasions.

I have much to confess.

Thank you all who contributed hear in helping me to better form my conscience.

I am glad that this thread was helpful in different ways.