If 1st marriage was never annulled, then 2nd marriage wouldn't need to be since it wasn't valid?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TabbyLilac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TabbyLilac

Guest
Hi there, I have posted on here before and am a former protestant in the process of converting to Catholicism along with my fiance (and our 2 young children). First of all, yes I realize that I will need to discuss all of this with my priest. However he is on a pilgrimage to Mexico right now and this question has just occurred to me and is eating at my mind, so I thought I would brave this forum again in hopes that someone here will have dealt with a similar situation before (or maybe even IS a canon lawyer).

A little background that may (or may not) be relevant… I was raised by atheist parents. In my 20s I was briefly married twice, for less than a year each time. This was before I was Christian. Neither of my ex-husbands were Christian either or even believed in God. Both “marriages” took place in a courthouse. My fiance and I are in the process of becoming Catholic and want to be married in a Nuptial Mass. Obviously I need to have my previous marriages annulled in order to do that… or do I?? Which leads me to my question:

Assuming that both marriages WOULD qualify for annulment, wouldn’t I only really need to go through the annulment process for the FIRST marriage anyway, since in the eyes of the Catholic Church the 2nd marriage was never valid since I hadn’t received an annulment for the 1st one?

Again, obviously I will be open and disclose all of this to my priest. But I just got to thinking, why would you need to annul a second marriage when it was technically (in the eyes of the Church) not a valid marriage since I was still married to the first husband? I could be way off base here but it would be nice just to not have to go through it all twice.

Thank you to anyone with knowledge about this issue they are willing to share.
 
There are two possibilities here.

First possibility - you get your first marriage annulled. In this case, your first marriage is considered to have been never really valid, so it couldn’t affect the validity of your second marriage. In this possibility, you need to annul all prior marriages in the order they occurred. In your case, this would mean going through the annulment process twice.

Second possibility - you get your first marriage dissolved, via the Pauline privilege. In this case, your first marriage is considered to have been valid at the time, so it did make your second marriage invalid from the get-go. So, you would only need to apply the Pauline privilege once.
 
TabbyLilac said:
…I was raised by atheist parents. In my 20s I was briefly married twice, for less than a year each time. This was before I was Christian. Neither of my ex-husbands were Christian either or even believed in God. Both “marriages” took place in a courthouse. My fiance and I are in the process of becoming Catholic and want to be married in a Nuptial Mass. Obviously I need to have my previous marriages annulled in order to do that… or do I?? Which leads me to my question:

Assuming that both marriages WOULD qualify for annulment, wouldn’t I only really need to go through the annulment process for the FIRST marriage anyway, since in the eyes of the Catholic Church the 2nd marriage was never valid since I hadn’t received an annulment for the 1st one? …
Click to expand...
Hello,

For a time, some “American” Tribunals were handling such cases in the way you suggest: say the second marriage is invalid because of the first one and then say the first one is now known to be invalid…but, at the time of that second marriage, the first one was thought to be valid. This “inept manner of proceeding” (as it was called by the authorities in Rome) was condemned in 1987. It is wrong to say that a marriage is invalid because of a prior marriage that is then said to have never existed.

You will have to have both of those marriages examined in the ordinary process (I don’t know if dissolution is an option for either…) and, if warranted, declared invalid.

Dan
 
Thank you both for your very helpful insight and info… it is greatly appreciated!
 
TabbyLilac said:
Hi there, I have posted on here before and am a former protestant in the process of converting to Catholicism along with my fiance (and our 2 young children). First of all, yes I realize that I will need to discuss all of this with my priest. However he is on a pilgrimage to Mexico right now and this question has just occurred to me and is eating at my mind, so I thought I would brave this forum again in hopes that someone here will have dealt with a similar situation before (or maybe even IS a canon lawyer).

A little background that may (or may not) be relevant… I was raised by atheist parents. In my 20s I was briefly married twice, for less than a year each time. This was before I was Christian. **Neither of my ex-husbands were Christian either or even believed in God. Both “marriages” took place in a courthouse. ** My fiance and I are in the process of becoming Catholic and want to be married in a Nuptial Mass. Obviously I need to have my previous marriages annulled in order to do that… or do I?? Which leads me to my question:

Assuming that both marriages WOULD qualify for annulment, wouldn’t I only really need to go through the annulment process for the FIRST marriage anyway, since in the eyes of the Catholic Church the 2nd marriage was never valid since I hadn’t received an annulment for the 1st one?

Again, obviously I will be open and disclose all of this to my priest. But I just got to thinking, why would you need to annul a second marriage when it was technically (in the eyes of the Church) not a valid marriage since I was still married to the first husband? I could be way off base here but it would be nice just to not have to go through it all twice.

Thank you to anyone with knowledge about this issue they are willing to share.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong but as far as I know, since those marriages were not sacramental, they don’t need to be annulled at all. It is my understanding that only sacramental marriages require annulment.
 
AdamPeter said:
I may be wrong but as far as I know, since those marriages were not sacramental, they don’t need to be annulled at all. It is my understanding that only sacramental marriages require annulment.
Click to expand...
This is a misunderstanding. Canon law states:
Can. 1085 §1. A person bound by the bond of a prior marriage, even if it was not consummated, invalidly attempts marriage.
In other words, a prior marriage, whether sacramental or not, makes any subsequent attempt at marriage not just illicit, but completely invalid.

Note that the prior marriage must have been a valid marriage, and the person must still be bound by that prior marriage, i.e., the marriage has not been dissolved either by the death of the spouse or by the Pauline or Petrine privilege.
 
AdamPeter said:
I may be wrong but as far as I know, since those marriages were not sacramental, they don’t need to be annulled at all. It is my understanding that only sacramental marriages require annulment.
Click to expand...
This is wrong. All marriages need to be reviewed by a tribunal to determine what process is to take place, not just sacramental ones.
 
AdamPeter said:
I may be wrong but as far as I know, since those marriages were not sacramental, they don’t need to be annulled at all. It is my understanding that only sacramental marriages require annulment.
Click to expand...
That is not correct. The annulment process deals with validity, not sacramentality. A valid marriage between two baptized people is automatically sacramental. And if one or both parties is not baptized, the marriage cannot be sacramental, but it is still presumed valid unless the contrary is proven. Hence the need for an annulment.
 
Your first two marriages fall under the Pauline privilege. Neither of you were baptized before being married. I am in the same boat and am in the process of having the matter cleaned up so that my husband and I can have our marriage convalidated.
An annulment is not needed. You will need to have the tribunal look over the matter, provide the appropriate paperwork and then wait until this is taken care of. Actually doesn’t take long if you have a speedy person working on this and if you get your information in quickly. You will need all marriage licenses and all divorce decrees, all original copies.
 
shelly5254 said:
Your first two marriages fall under the Pauline privilege. Neither of you were baptized before being married. I am in the same boat and am in the process of having the matter cleaned up so that my husband and I can have our marriage convalidated. …
Click to expand...
Hello,

That kind of dissolution might be possible but, sometimes, it’s easier said than done.

If that is the route taken, what “Just Lurking” said may work: accept the first marriage as valid and dissolved at some future date and, in the meantime, have the second be addressed as a “prior bond.”

You can’t dissolve two marriages by one usage of the Pauline Privilege.

Dan
 
TabbyLilac,

I looked at another thread of yours and there you said that you think both of the men you married were baptized as children. Here, you say that neither were Christian.

If they were baptized, then you would not be able to go the Pauline privilege route, even if they were practical pagans at the time you married them.

Dan
 
AdamPeter said:
I may be wrong but as far as I know, since those marriages were not sacramental, they don’t need to be annulled at all. It is my understanding that only sacramental marriages require annulment.
Click to expand...
No, you are incorrect here. The petitioners will have to include information about ALL marriages. The process will be done only once if all information is provided. Then, the Tribunal will sort it all out. To the original question, once your priest returns from MX, he will provdie the proper forms based on the type of marital status involved. It is a small price to pay with a great reward. Take heart and cooperate fully for the best results.
 
I think we have established the fact that AdamPeter is mistaken…at least in general.

Dan
 
dans0622 said:
TabbyLilac,

I looked at another thread of yours and there you said that you think both of the men you married were baptized as children. Here, you say that neither were Christian.

If they were baptized, then you would not be able to go the Pauline privilege route, even if they were practical pagans at the time you married them.

Dan
Click to expand...
Isn’t one of the other questions for dissolution is who ended the marriage? Assuming that neither man were baptized, if the OP is the one who left the marriage then Pauline privilege would not apply either, correct? Isn’t pauline privilege meant to address the abandonment of a spouse by a pagan when the spouse becomes Christian?

I have been under the impression that the Christian is not supposed to be the one that abandoned the marriage, but I could be (and likely am) wrong.
 
dans0622 said:
TabbyLilac,

I looked at another thread of yours and there you said that you think both of the men you married were baptized as children. Here, you say that neither were Christian.

If they were baptized, then you would not be able to go the Pauline privilege route, even if they were practical pagans at the time you married them.

Dan
Click to expand...
Thank you for being so thorough. I went ahead and contacted both of them recently to let them know that a response from them MAY be needed as I pursue annulments and was able to clear up whether or not they had been baptized as I was not sure before. I assumed that they were, as one has parents who are fairly religious now. Regardless, neither of them were.
 
TabbyLilac said:
Thank you both for your very helpful insight and info… it is greatly appreciated!
Click to expand...
I think you’d be better off waiting for your priest to get back. This is very confusing and the only one closest to knowing what to do is Shelly5254, post 9. God Bless, Memaw
 
We have a canon lawyer who is a member here, but unfortunately, he doesn’t post often.

I think you need to have both of your marriages annulled, which wouldn’t be difficult since they took place in a courthouse. But your priest will make the determination.

And, just as important, you and your fiance must live chastely - no sexual relations! - from now until your baptism. Catholicism welcomes your entire family into the faith, but we don’t condone co-habitation, even among those who are planning to be married. It would be nice if you could move out and live with family until your marriage, or if he could move out. But if neither one of you can, live chastely since you are converting.

Edit: I see dan did post! Great!
 
Memaw said:
I think you’d be better off waiting for your priest to get back. This is very confusing and the only one closest to knowing what to do is Shelly5254, post 9. God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
Actually, dans is a canon lawyer and has provided the OP with good advice and accurate information.

She certainly does need to speak with her pastor, because details matter. But Dan’s first post addresses her question of “hey does it work this way…?” with an answer of “no”.
 
dans0622 said:
Hello,

For a time, some “American” Tribunals were handling such cases in the way you suggest: say the second marriage is invalid because of the first one and then say the first one is now known to be invalid…but, at the time of that second marriage, the first one was thought to be valid. This “inept manner of proceeding” (as it was called by the authorities in Rome) was condemned in 1987. It is wrong to say that a marriage is invalid because of a prior marriage that is then said to have never existed.

You will have to have both of those marriages examined in the ordinary process (I don’t know if dissolution is an option for either…) and, if warranted, declared invalid.

Dan
Click to expand...
How does that square with Canon 1085.2?
Can. 1085 §1. A person bound by the bond of a prior marriage, even if it was not consummated, invalidly attempts marriage.
Click to expand...
§2. Even if the prior marriage is invalid or dissolved for any reason, it is not on that account permitted to contract another before the nullity or dissolution of the prior marriage is established legitimately and certainly.
Click to expand...
I am merely curious, and bow to your superior resources since :bowdown:
I Am Not A Canon Lawyer

tee
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top