Help! Need a canon lawyer-marriage in 3 weeks. Impediment?

[Layp3rs0n]

I am supposed to get married to my fiance 3 weeks from today. Over a decade ago I was with another woman and she and I, like stupid young people (but both of age) exchanged vows while fornicating. There were no witnesses, and I don’t, as far as I can remember, believe any knowledge that such vows could possibly be binding. I do know that we did schedule real marriage prep with the Church later, and did not consider ourselves actually married. There was simply “I promise to love you until death do us part etc” said between us. Now, having brought this up to our parish priest, my new fiance and I are waiting to hear back from canon lawyers as to whether I need an annulment, and whether my ex and my stupid impromptu “vows” bound us Sacramemtally. We were both baptized Catholics. No witnesses, no danger of death, cant remember if any intent for those vows to actually be binding. At any rate, I am terrified at the possibility that I may now need to break it off with my current fiance, breaking both our hearts. I’ve read different things stating that impediment of clandestinity is not an impediment in the USA and others stating this is only waived in emergency circumstances. I’m confused and heartsick. Please, if anyone here is familiar, intimately, with canon law, get back to me to ease my troubled mind while I wait to hearback from my priest. Again, we are three weeks out from the ceremony. Help!

 

[edward_george1]

So you said vows amongst yourselves, without a witness, without a clergyman present? That’s not marriage in any possible sense of the word, unless there’s something I’m missing here.

-Fr ACEGC

 

[Layp3rs0n]

Father, this is exactly what I needed to know. Thank you! I’m just trying to confirm what is my suspicion. Have been poring over canon law and exegesisthereof. Including the history of the application of the impediment of clandestinity. I dont think you are missing anything. Just need assurance that the vows said with my ex are indeed invalid, and since i am still waiting on our parish priest to get back to us, whether such a simple matter would even require an annulment. I asked since it is technically the spouses who confer the Sacrament each other.

 

[1ke]

I’m not sure what the problem is, or why this is coming up three weeks before your wedding.

Can. 1108 §1. Only those marriages are valid which are contracted before the local ordinary, pastor, or a priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who assist, and before two witnesses according to the rules expressed in the following canons and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. ⇒ 144, ⇒ 1112, §1, ⇒ 1116, and ⇒ 1127, §§1-2.

I am terrified at the possibility that I may now need to break it off with my current fiance, breaking both our hearts.

I don’t see why you would be letting your imagination run wild down this path.

We were both baptized Catholics.

Then I don’t see why your pastor couldn’t clear this up in about 5 minutes.

 

[edward_george1]

At this point I’m more concerned about you being impeded by not understanding the sacrament of marriage than by a prior bond. Talk to your priest.

 

[Greenfields]

I can see you asked this same question some years ago OP.It would have been good to have spoken with a priest way back then and live your life accordingly .God bless.

 

[Limoncello4021]

I strongly agree with this. Did you take marriage preparation? Understand the sacrament of marriage? It doesn’t seem that you do. I’d suggest you NOT get married until you have this understanding.

 

[His_helpmeet]

I believe that in medieval times this WAS considered a valid “marriage”. (A betrothal, as it was called, was considered tantamount to a marriage.) The reason these betrothals were no longer considered valid was primarily to do with the custom at the time of arranged marriage. If one of the partners didn’t agree with the proposed match, he or she would sometimes claim a prior bond, namely a situation similar to what you describe - private vows of betrothal taken with no witnesses present. The problem was that there was no way to verify that this had actually happened due to the absence of any witnesses. As a result, the Church determined that such betrothals did not constitute a valid prior bond.

 

[JMMJ]

Sounds like run-of-the-mill pillow talk to me. Don’t see how that could be considered a marriage in any way shape or form.

 

[Gorgias]

I believe that in medieval times this WAS considered a valid “marriage”.

In “medieval times”, there wasn’t the requirement of ‘form’ for valid marriage.

Now, having brought this up to our parish priest, my new fiance and I are waiting to hear back from canon lawyers as to whether I need an annulment, and whether my ex and my stupid impromptu “vows” bound us Sacramemtally.

Your parish priest knows (or should know) that this is neither sacramental nor valid. He might be looking into the question of whether it’s an actual invalid attempt at marriage, but from what you’ve written here, and presuming that there isn’t anything more to the story, then the answer is “no, it’s not even an invalid attempt at marriage.”

Be at peace. Talk to your priest, if you’re really worried about it, and let him know about your concern. He’ll set your mind at ease.

 

[Layp3rs0n]

I did and I was not much concerned with it before my priest became concerned (I mentioned it previously to him but I think he was quite tired and it didnt register). The concern started when he said he needed canon lawyers involved. iI’m merely scrupulous and have anxiety disorder. I am glad to hear i am worried over nothing. Thank you.

 

[edward_george1]

Have you discussed your anxiety disorder with your priest and your fiance?

 

[Layp3rs0n]

Many times. They are well aware.

 

[dochawk]

I believe that in medieval times this WAS considered a valid “marriage”.

Roughly 700 years ago, the requirement that a priest witness the vows was imposed, as couples came back disputing whether or not they had exchanged vows.

It has only been necessary that the priest request vows for about thirty years.

There are exceptions in areas not regularly served by clergy.

In the american southwest, through the late nineteen century and maybe the twentieth, it was still common for the couple to wed, with priest signing their bible when he camet hrough months later.

 

[otjm]

We no longer live in medieval times. They are now post evil.

I love a number of people and hope to do so until death do us part; and in no way do I consider myself married to any of them.

As noted in some of the posts, I hope you have your head on straight at this point and know what you are preparing to begin.

at that point back then? Nope.That sounds far more like guilt talking than love, as love does not result in fornication. That is confusing lust with love - two entirely different things, and in direct opposition of each other.

God bless you both on your journey through life.

 

[goout]

I am supposed to get married to my fiance 3 weeks from today. Over a decade ago I was with another woman and she and I, like stupid young people (but both of age) exchanged vows while fornicating. There were no witnesses, and I don’t, as far as I can remember, believe any knowledge that such vows could possibly be binding. I do know that we did schedule real marriage prep with the Church later, and did not consider ourselves actually married. There was simply “I promise to love you until death do us part etc” said between us. Now, having brought this up to our parish priest, my new fiance and I are waiting to hear back from canon lawyers as to whether I need an annulment, and whether my ex and my stupid impromptu “vows” bound us Sacramemtally. We were both baptized Catholics. No witnesses, no danger of death, cant remember if any intent for those vows to actually be binding. At any rate, I am terrified at the possibility that I may now need to break it off with my current fiance, breaking both our hearts. I’ve read different things stating that impediment of clandestinity is not an impediment in the USA and others stating this is only waived in emergency circumstances. I’m confused and heartsick. Please, if anyone here is familiar, intimately, with canon law, get back to me to ease my troubled mind while I wait to hearback from my priest. Again, we are three weeks out from the ceremony. Help!

You might want to seriously consider that marriage will bring you many more difficult issues than the one you are facing here.