Divorce/Annulment question for a new Catholic

[sophie555]

I am newly divorced with two very small children. I got married 7 years ago to my high school sweetheart. At the time we were both unbaptized, although I was a practicing Protestant. Two years ago I felt drawn to attend Catholic mass, and after attending for a few months, I knew I belonged. I knew I needed to raise my children in the Church and thus joined the RCIA program. My husband supported me in this, but refused to join the Church himself and called himself an atheist. I was baptized and confirmed on Easter. After my second child was born I wanted to have my children baptized. The priest told me he would not baptize the children unless my husband and I received a sacramental marriage in the Church. My husband flat out refused to do this and two weeks later I discovered he was having an affair. He then moved out and left me with the children with no hope of reconciliation. Our divorce has been final for a month now. My question is do I need to have this marriage annulled if I should ever marry in the Church? I would just like to know if this is an option for me or not. Will a Catholic man be permitted to marry me if I have been divorced, even if the marriage was not a sacramental marriage within the Church?

 

[Wolniewicz]

I am sorry for your loss, and you are in my prayers!

I think if you wish to marry a Catholic Man at some point in the future you will need to get an Annulment for your marriage. Because it is still a valid marriage just not with the church from what I understand. So even if you get a divorce you are still seen as married in the Catholic faith, so it would be sinful and wrong for a Catholic Man to marry you. But if you get an Annulment then you can get married to another man

Forgive me if I am wrong but I am sure some one will give you the whole details

God Bless

 

[Aelred_Minor]

If you wish to have the possibility of marrying again you will need to either have your marriage annulled (declared that it was never valid) by the Church or, if it was/is valid, then dissolved by the Church. Since you were both unbaptized at the time you got married and he never got baptized it would seem that both would be possibilities. A marriage between two unbaptized persons or between one baptized and one unbaptized person is valid but not sacramental, and valid but nonsacramental marriages are extrinsically dissoluble, meaning you and your husband cannot truly end your own marriage from within (until death), but the Church can truly end it. This as opposed to valid sacramental marriages (a valid marriage between two baptized people) which are both intrinsically and extrinsically indissoluble, meaning even the Church can’t end it.

Definitely approach your parish priest about the subject, and presumably he can set you on the right path for getting your marriage situation resolved.

Also ask again about getting your children baptized, now that your husband has moved out. Honestly I can’t figure out why your priest would not baptize them in the first place, since your husband refused to be baptized and as long as he remained unbaptized it would have been impossible for your marriage to have become sacramental, and anyway there are many such mixed marriages these days and I’ve never heard of them being an impediment to the children being baptized as long as the Catholic parent intended to raise the children Catholic. But maybe I’m missing something.

 

[Will_S]

Aelred’s answer has all the right information, but I’d like to emphasize the point that in your case, your marriage was only a natural marriage and it can be dissolved by the Church if and when you wish to marry a Catholic man, even if an annulment is not possible for you.

 

[puzzleannie]

I Our divorce has been final for a month now. My question is do I need to have this marriage annulled if I should ever marry in the Church? I would just like to know if this is an option for me or not. Will a Catholic man be permitted to marry me if I have been divorced, even if the marriage was not a sacramental marriage within the Church?

A divorced person does not need an annulment to enter the Church. You need at least to establish the fact that your first marriage was invalid before you date or attempt marriage again. That may or may not require a full blown annulment investigation, depending on several variables. That is why you should see the priest, who already knows something of your situation, lay out all the facts of your marriage situation and let him guide you on how to proceed.

I doubt any reasonable Catholic man who loves you would be detered by the fact that you have been married before, as long as he knows you are free to marry again. ONe thing at a time. See the priest.

Welcome home

btw the priest acted properly in delaying (not denying) baptism for the children because of the husband’s opposition. He needs assurance the children will be raised Catholic, and as things stood at that time, there was little reason to believe the husband would allow this. I hope OP finds, as so many do, that annulment becomes a healing process, and one of self-knowledge that increases the possibility of a happier relationship in the future.

 

[Phemie]

btw the priest acted properly in delaying (not denying) baptism for the children because of the husband’s opposition. He needs assurance the children will be raised Catholic, and as things stood at that time, there was little reason to believe the husband would allow this.

I don’t agree. He has supported her conversion, why would the priest assume that he wouldn’t support her raising children Catholic? The priest refused because one party of a validly married couple didn’t want to go through an unnecessary ceremony.

You know, as strange as it seems, sometimes priests just don’t know what they’re supposed to do or what the Church teaches. I had one argue black and blue that the Anglican/Episcopal Church had valid ordinations and priests who convert don’t need to be re-ordained because they already are.

That one obviously didn’t know that two non-baptized marry validly “outside the Church” unless there was an impediment.

 

[puzzleannie]

I don’t agree. He has supported her conversion, why would the priest assume that he wouldn’t support her raising children Catholic? The priest refused because one party of a validly married couple didn’t want to go through an unnecessary ceremony.

.

flat out refusing to have a child baptized is a good indicator that he does not support raising the child Catholic. In any case, the priest was on the scene, we were not. There is no reason to debate his judgment since it was actually proven sound subsequently. There is obviously more to the story if the priest considered them invalidly married than OP has given, since normally two unbaptized persons who are otherwise free to marry enter into a valid natural marriage. That is why I advise she go back and talk to that priest. And OP is under no obligation to explain further or offer details here. Our obligation is to welcome and support her.

 

[Phemie]

flat out refusing to have a child baptized is a good indicator that he does not support raising the child Catholic. In any case, the priest was on the scene, we were not. There is no reason to debate his judgment since it was actually proven sound subsequently. There is obviously more to the story if the priest considered them invalidly married than OP has given, since normally two unbaptized persons who are otherwise free to marry enter into a valid natural marriage. That is why I advise she go back and talk to that priest. And OP is under no obligation to explain further or offer details here. Our obligation is to welcome and support her.

But she didn’t say her husband refused to have the baby baptized, she said “The priest told me he would not baptize the children** unless my husband and I received a sacramental marriage in the Church. My husband flat out refused to do** this and two weeks later I discovered he was having an affair.”

They obviously weren’t in an invalid marriage or she wouldn’t have been able to be baptized, something which her husband had supported.

It’s true that perhaps the OP has omitted details which she is not obligated to reveal in a public forum, but on the surface something appears very wrong with the priest’s refusal and insistence on a convalidation.

 

[sophie555]

Thank you all for your responses. It has been an overwhelming process, but I cannot express how much our Church has supported and guided me through it all. For further clarification, my children did eventually get baptized by that priest. He soon realized that my husband was not going to change and reconcile and that as a single Catholic mother I could and would raise the children in the Church. My children’s godparents were also instrumental in this process and served as witnesses that I would in fact raise them Catholic. I do not know officially how the Church stands on this issue, I just knew as a Catholic mother, not having my children baptized felt unnatural and wrong.
I am not sure where God will lead me, as to whether I will ever marry again, but I want to make sure I am aligned with Church doctrine in case the occasion does arise in the distant future. Thanks again for all your support!

"I am not at all worried about the future. I am sure God will do His will, it is the only grace I desire."
-St. Therese of Lisieux

 

[yablabo]

I am newly divorced with two very small children. I got married 7 years ago to my high school sweetheart. At the time we were both unbaptized, although I was a practicing Protestant. Two years ago I felt drawn to attend Catholic mass, and after attending for a few months, I knew I belonged. I knew I needed to raise my children in the Church and thus joined the RCIA program. My husband supported me in this, but refused to join the Church himself and called himself an atheist. I was baptized and confirmed on Easter. After my second child was born I wanted to have my children baptized. The priest told me he would not baptize the children unless my husband and I received a sacramental marriage in the Church. My husband flat out refused to do this and two weeks later I discovered he was having an affair. He then moved out and left me with the children with no hope of reconciliation. Our divorce has been final for a month now. My question is do I need to have this marriage annulled if I should ever marry in the Church? I would just like to know if this is an option for me or not. Will a Catholic man be permitted to marry me if I have been divorced, even if the marriage was not a sacramental marriage within the Church?

It looks like you may have an excellent case for an exercise of the Pauline Privilege. After your baptism, if your spouse did not wish to live with you in peace, your possibly valid natural marriage could be dissolved by making use of this privilege so that you may marry a faithful member of Holy Mother Church.

Merely ask your pastor if that is the case, and if so, what forms you need to fill out to take advantage.

– Nicole

 

[lapp132]

If you wish to have the possibility of marrying again you will need to either have your marriage annulled (declared that it was never valid) by the Church or, if it was/is valid, then dissolved by the Church. Since you were both unbaptized at the time you got married and he never got baptized it would seem that both would be possibilities. A marriage between two unbaptized persons or between one baptized and one unbaptized person is valid but not sacramental, and valid but nonsacramental marriages are extrinsically dissoluble, meaning you and your husband cannot truly end your own marriage from within (until death), but the Church can truly end it. This as opposed to valid sacramental marriages (a valid marriage between two baptized people) which are both intrinsically and extrinsically indissoluble, meaning even the Church can’t end it.

Definitely approach your parish priest about the subject, and presumably he can set you on the right path for getting your marriage situation resolved.

Also ask again about getting your children baptized, now that your husband has moved out. Honestly I can’t figure out why your priest would not baptize them in the first place, since your husband refused to be baptized and as long as he remained unbaptized it would have been impossible for your marriage to have become sacramental, and anyway there are many such mixed marriages these days and I’ve never heard of them being an impediment to the children being baptized as long as the Catholic parent intended to raise the children Catholic. But maybe I’m missing something.

 

[lapp132]

If you wish to have the possibility of marrying again you will need to either have your marriage annulled (declared that it was never valid) by the Church or, if it was/is valid, then dissolved by the Church. Since you were both unbaptized at the time you got married and he never got baptized it would seem that both would be possibilities. A marriage between two unbaptized persons or between one baptized and one unbaptized person is valid but not sacramental, and valid but nonsacramental marriages are extrinsically dissoluble, meaning you and your husband cannot truly end your own marriage from within (until death), but the Church can truly end it. This as opposed to valid sacramental marriages (a valid marriage between two baptized people) which are both intrinsically and extrinsically indissoluble, meaning even the Church can’t end it.

Definitely approach your parish priest about the subject, and presumably he can set you on the right path for getting your marriage situation resolved.

Also ask again about getting your children baptized, now that your husband has moved out. Honestly I can’t figure out why your priest would not baptize them in the first place, since your husband refused to be baptized and as long as he remained unbaptized it would have been impossible for your marriage to have become sacramental, and anyway there are many such mixed marriages these days and I’ve never heard of them being an impediment to the children being baptized as long as the Catholic parent intended to raise the children Catholic. But maybe I’m missing something.

My ex wife and I were both babtised ,made all our sacraments,went to 12 years of catholic school,have three children and were annulled just 4 weeks ago,

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

But she didn’t say her husband refused to have the baby baptized, she said “The priest told me he would not baptize the children** unless my husband and I received a sacramental marriage in the Church. My husband flat out refused to do** this and two weeks later I discovered he was having an affair.”

They obviously weren’t in an invalid marriage or she wouldn’t have been able to be baptized, something which her husband had supported.

It’s true that perhaps the OP has omitted details which she is not obligated to reveal in a public forum, but on the surface something appears very wrong with the priest’s refusal and insistence on a convalidation.

It’s not our place to second guess the actions of the priest in this case. Especially because we do not have all the information involved.

I would say a man refusing to have his marriage made sacramental shows an unwillingness towards the faith and would raise questions as to whether or not he would allow the children to be not only educated in the faith but also support and not undermine that education.

But as I said, we do not have all the information and second guessing the actions of the priest here is not helpful in any way.

 

[Phemie]

It’s not our place to second guess the actions of the priest in this case. Especially because we do not have all the information involved.

I would say a man refusing to have his marriage made sacramental shows an unwillingness towards the faith and would raise questions as to whether or not he would allow the children to be not only educated in the faith but also support and not undermine that education.

But as I said, we do not have all the information and second guessing the actions of the priest here is not helpful in any way.

You’re missing the point, he couldn’t have his marriage made ‘sacramental’, he is not baptized. His marriage to her, when neither was baptized, was presumed valid. There was no earthly reason for him to undergo a ceremony which meant nothing to him. Even if they had needed a convalidation, which they obviously didn’t, theirs would have been a good candidate for a radical sanation.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

You’re missing the point, he couldn’t have his marriage made ‘sacramental’, he is not baptized. His marriage to her, when neither was baptized, was presumed valid. There was no earthly reason for him to undergo a ceremony which meant nothing to him. Even if they had needed a convalidation, which they obviously didn’t, theirs would have been a good candidate for a radical sanation.

I missed no point.

You missed the point.

We do not have all the information.

The second guessing of clergy that occurs on this forum is sickening.

 

[Warrior1979]

I am not sure where God will lead me, as to whether I will ever marry again, but I want to make sure I am aligned with Church doctrine in case the occasion does arise in the distant future. Thanks again for all your support!

Just a word of advice: I would recommend starting the process sooner rather than later. There reason is that these things take time. The process could easily take a year or more, and if you decide to remarry, it could take another year on top of that (for pre-Cana, etc.).