Edited: Marriage question: Annulment necessary for civil unions?

[1ke]

Thanks everybody. Right now it’s hypothetical but I was wondering for the future. What about a man(myself) who was once engaged to a Catholic but never actually married. I would think engagements count in spirit even if they don’t meet the strict legal definition…

See canon 1062, which covers engagement.

No it does not “count in spirit” as a marriage of any type.

 

[FrDavid96]

in the case of a Catholic who marries civilly without dispensation there is no “case of doubt” and the marriage does not “enjoy the favor of the law.” It is, on its face, invalid.

No. Not true. Once again, here’s the canon:

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

In the case of a Catholic who marries in a civil-only ceremony without any kind of dispensation, the standard for proving that it was invalid is a rather easy one to meet. It is a short process to declare it null. But that is not at all the same thing as saying that it “does not enjoy the favor of the law.” Please see canon 1060.

Here’s a link to a petition for declaration of nullity on the grounds of lack of canonical form. Take a look at it.
archny.org/media/files/Petition%20Declaration-of%20Nullity-2008.pdf

The marriage (attempt-at) has to be formally declared null by the bishop or his delegate. Who that delegate may be, can and does vary, that’s not the point. But a formal declaration is necessary.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

No. Not true. Once again, here’s the canon:

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

In the case of a Catholic who marries in a civil-only ceremony without any kind of dispensation, the standard for proving that it was invalid is a rather easy one to meet. It is a short process to declare it null. But that is not at all the same thing as saying that it “does not enjoy the favor of the law.” Please see canon 1060.

Here’s a link to a petition for declaration of nullity on the grounds of lack of canonical form. Take a look at it.
archny.org/media/files/Petition%20Declaration-of%20Nullity-2008.pdf

The marriage (attempt-at) has to be formally declared null by the bishop or his delegate. Who that delegate may be, can and does vary, that’s not the point. But a formal declaration is necessary.

Hasn’t Pope Benedict XVI repealed the canon in the 1983 Code that allowed Catholics to formal leave the Church.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hasn’t Pope Benedict XVI repealed the canon in the 1983 Code that allowed Catholics to formal leave the Church.

Yes. The form needs to be updated. You get bonus points for noticing.

I only picked that diocese because I thought I was likely to find a lot of info on their web page.

 

[michaelctk]

the important point is that you truly LOVEthe woman.many people who marry in the church and do not have any history of divorce or the likes do not truly love each other. If you love this person and you know that in your heart of hearts you are faithful to them and have a truelove for them then good for you!

Imagine Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was beside you right now and you asked him the question.No person on earth could know what his reply would be,however I do know that love be it for a friend or an enemy is the message of god.

 

[Usige]

The marriage (attempt-at) has to be formally declared null by the bishop or his delegate. Who that delegate may be, can and does vary, that’s not the point. But a formal declaration is necessary.

Thank you Fr David, for pointing this out. I think some people forget (are unaware) that two Catholics that had a civil marriage could also petition for a Radical Sanation which would retroactively make their marriage valid. The reason for that is that ALL marriages are presumed valid until formally declare null.

 

[Phemie]

No. Not true. Once again, here’s the canon:

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

In the case of a Catholic who marries in a civil-only ceremony without any kind of dispensation, the standard for proving that it was invalid is a rather easy one to meet. It is a short process to declare it null. But that is not at all the same thing as saying that it “does not enjoy the favor of the law.” Please see canon 1060.

How can a marriage be presumed valid for the purpose of remarriage yet require a convalidation to be valid so the Catholic can receive Communion? That doesn’t make sense.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

You get bonus points for noticing.

 

[1ke]

The marriage (attempt-at) has to be formally declared null by the bishop or his delegate. Who that delegate may be, can and does vary, that’s not the point. But a formal declaration is necessary.

This is not accurate.

In the US, the Church has an administrative procedure for lack of form. This is NOT a requirement of the universal Church.

In Europe, if there is no record of a marriage in the sacramental record, that is it. No investigation. No paperwork. Nada.

No presumption of validity. No declaration by the bishop or his delegate. No administrative process.

 

[1ke]

Thank you Fr David, for pointing this out. I think some people forget (are unaware) that two Catholics that had a civil marriage could also petition for a Radical Sanation which would retroactively make their marriage valid. The reason for that is that ALL marriages are presumed valid until formally declare null.

If they petition for Radical Sanation it is the sanction that makes it valid.

It is not valid beforehand. And the sacramental records are updated via the sanation process.

ALL marriage are not presumed valid. Only those who are on their face valid, only those which present a “case of doubt” must be investigated, which a Catholic marrying outside form without dispensation is not.

 

[Bluegoat]

This is not accurate.

In the US, the Church has an administrative procedure for lack of form. This is NOT a requirement of the universal Church.

In Europe, if there is no record of a marriage in the sacramental record, that is it. No investigation. No paperwork. Nada.

No presumption of validity. No declaration by the bishop or his delegate. No administrative process.

Do they just take the word of the person who wants to be married that the first marriage is not recorded, or do they actually look?

 

[Phemie]

Do they just take the word of the person who wants to be married that the first marriage is not recorded, or do they actually look?

The Catholic always has to present a recent Certificate of Baptism which will note whether or not he/she received the sacrament of Confirmation and whether or not a marriage is recorded. If the Catholic was married according to form (or not according to form but with a dispensation for such a marriage), the marriage would be recorded in the baptismal register. No record of marriage = free to marry.

In my diocese, the last bishop just got the priest to record a lack of form marriage in the pre-nuptial investigation booklet and keep a copy of the marriage certificate or license (whichever contained the information about the location of the wedding and the officiant), the divorce decree and the recent Certificate of Baptism. No submission to the diocesan Tribunal was necessary.

 

[FrDavid96]

If they petition for Radical Sanation it is the sanction that makes it valid.

It is not valid beforehand. And the sacramental records are updated via the sanation process.

ALL marriage are not presumed valid. Only those who are on their face valid, only those which present a “case of doubt” must be investigated, which a Catholic marrying outside form without dispensation is not.

1ke,

Will you please, please, read the canon:

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

You keep repeating this. You cannot possibly be more wrong.

Read the canon. I’m begging you. Please read the canon.

Every marriage enjoys the favor of the law until otherwise proven.

 

[FrDavid96]

The Catholic always has to present a recent Certificate of Baptism which will note whether or not he/she received the sacrament of Confirmation and whether or not a marriage is recorded. If the Catholic was married according to form (or not according to form but with a dispensation for such a marriage), the marriage would be recorded in the baptismal register. No record of marriage = free to marry.

In my diocese, the last bishop just got the priest to record a lack of form marriage in the pre-nuptial investigation booklet and keep a copy of the marriage certificate or license (whichever contained the information about the location of the wedding and the officiant), the divorce decree and the recent Certificate of Baptism. No submission to the diocesan Tribunal was necessary.

Phemie,

You keep trying to defend what you’re trying to say, but it isn’t working.

As I said earlier, if the bishop of that diocese decided to delegate that function to someone else (let’s say the pastor of the parish) that’s all well and good. He has that authority.

Not quite. The civil marriage of a Catholic without a dispensation is not presumed valid.

You are stuck on defending this post you made earlier. It cannot be defended.

No marriage is “not presumed valid.”

I’ll direct you to actually read the canon that addresses this. I’ve posted it over and over again, but apparently you still haven’t read it.

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

 

[FrDavid96]

How can a marriage be presumed valid for the purpose of remarriage yet require a convalidation to be valid so the Catholic can receive Communion? That doesn’t make sense.

Because that’s what the word con-validated means.

The marriage is a legal civil marriage. It has been validated by the state.

In a con-validation, the Church makes into a Sacrament, that which is already legally-valid, making it both valid in the eyes of the law, and valid in terms of a sacrament. Con-valid.

It doesn’t matter what you post. You’re not going to change what’s in canon law.

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

 

[1ke]

Do they just take the word of the person who wants to be married that the first marriage is not recorded, or do they actually look?

All persons seeking marriage go through a premarital investigation which includes producing sacramental records.

 

[Phemie]

Because that’s what the word con-validated means.

The marriage is a legal civil marriage. It has been validated by the state.

In a con-validation, the Church makes into a Sacrament, that which is already legally-valid, making it both valid in the eyes of the law, and valid in terms of a sacrament. Con-valid.

It doesn’t matter what you post. You’re not going to change what’s in canon law.
Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

Convalidation makes a marriage VALID – it may or may not make it sacramental, depending on the baptismal status of the spouses.

A canon lawyer made it clear on these boards before, the marriage of a Catholic outside the Church without a dispensation doesn’t enjoy the presumption of validity. That’s why that Catholic is to abstain from receiving Communion. The prenuptial investigation can deal with the documents although in North America such cases are usually submitted to the Tribunal.

 

[FrDavid96]

Convalidation makes a marriage VALID – it may or may not make it sacramental, depending on the baptismal status of the spouses.

A canon lawyer made it clear on these boards before, the marriage of a Catholic outside the Church without a dispensation doesn’t enjoy the presumption of validity. That’s why that Catholic is to abstain from receiving Communion. The prenuptial investigation can deal with the documents although in North America such cases are usually submitted to the Tribunal.

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

 

[Phemie]

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

The Church herself tells the Catholics married outside the Church without a dispensation that they are in an invalid marriage, therefore there is no doubt about the validity, it doesn’t exist.

 

[FrDavid96]

The Church herself tells the Catholics married outside the Church without a dispensation that they are in an invalid marriage, therefore there is no doubt about the validity, it doesn’t exist.

It still has to be proven.

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.