Is a Catholic Divorice ever permitted?

[TrueLight]

****So I just covered the Pauline Privilege, which is not an anullment, briefly in my instruction.

Any comments from the Canon law experts?

PAULINE PRIVILEGE

In Paul’s epistle it states:

“ To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband … and that the husband should not divorce his wife. To the rest I say, not the Lord, … But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace. (1 Corinthians 7:10-15, RSV) ”

The first section, “not I but the Lord”, matches Jesus’ teaching on divorce, found in the Expounding of the Law, Matthew 19:9, Luke 16:18, and Mark 10:11. The second section, “I say, not the Lord”, gives Paul’s own teaching on divorce.

In the Catholic Church and in some Protestant denominations (though most Protestants allow divorce in all serious circumstances), this is interpreted as allowing the dissolution of a marriage contracted between two non-baptized persons in the case that one (but not both) of the partners seeks baptism and converts to Christianity and the other partner leaves the marriage.

It is said that the Pauline Privilege differs from divorce in that it leaves the Christian partner free to remarry, despite the fact that Paul does not himself comment on the lawfulness of such a remarriage. It differs from annulment because it dissolves a valid actual marriage, in favor of the faith of the Christian partner, where annulments declare that a marriage was invalid from the beginning.

Canon Law:
DISSOLUTION OF THE BOND

Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death.

Can. 1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.

Can. 1143 §1. A marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons is dissolved by means of the pauline privilege in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the same party, provided that the non-baptized party departs.

§2. The non-baptized party is considered to depart if he or she does not wish to cohabit with the baptized party or to cohabit peacefully without aVront to the Creator unless the baptized party, after baptism was received, has given the other a just cause for departing.

Can. 1144 §1. For the baptized party to contract a new marriage validly, the non-baptized party must always be interrogated whether:

1/ he or she also wishes to receive baptism;

2/ he or she at least wishes to cohabit peacefully with the baptized party without aVront to the Creator.

§2. This interrogation must be done after baptism. For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can permit the interrogation to be done before baptism or can even dispense from the interrogation either before or after baptism provided that it is evident at least by a summary and extrajudicial process that it cannot be done or would be useless.

Can. 1145 §1. The interrogation is regularly to be done on the authority of the local ordinary of the converted party.

This ordinary must grant the other spouse a period of time to respond if the spouse seeks it, after having been advised, however, that his or her silence will be considered a negative response if the period passes without effect.

§2. Even an interrogation made privately by the converted party is valid and indeed licit if the form prescribed above cannot be observed.

§3. In either case, the fact that the interrogation was done and its outcome must be established legitimately in the external forum.

Can. 1146 The baptized party has the right to contract a new marriage with a Catholic party:

1/ if the other party responded negatively to the interrogation or if the interrogation had been omitted legitimately;

2/ if the non-baptized party, already interrogated or not, at first persevered in peaceful cohabitation without aVront to the Creator but then departed without a just cause, without prejudice to the prescripts of cann. ⇒ 1144 and ⇒ 1145.

Can. 1147 For a grave cause, however, the local ordinary can allow a baptized party who uses the pauline privilege to contract marriage with a non-Catholic party, whether baptized or not baptized; the prescripts of the canons about mixed marriages are also to be observed.

Can. 1148 §1. When he receives baptism in the Catholic Church, a non-baptized man who has several non-baptized wives at the same time can retain one of them after the others have been dismissed, if it is hard for him to remain with the first one. The same is valid for a non-baptized woman who has several non-baptized husbands at the same time.

§2. In the cases mentioned in §1, marriage must be contracted in legitimate form after baptism has been received, and the prescripts about mixed marriages, if necessary, and other matters required by the law are to be observed.

§3. Keeping in mind the moral, social, and economic conditions of places and of persons, the local ordinary is to take care that the needs of the first wife and the others dismissed are sufficiently provided for according to the norms of justice, Christian charity, and natural equity.

Can. 1149 A non-baptized person who, after having received baptism in the Catholic Church, cannot restore cohabitation with a non-baptized spouse by reason of captivity or persecution can contract another marriage even if the other party has received baptism in the meantime, without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 1141.

Can. 1150 In a doubtful matter the privilege of faith possesses the favor of the law.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

God also said he hates divorce.

Everyone hates divorce, even the couples getting it. You’ve made some pretty strong statements about annulments but those who have actually dealt with the annulments process disagree. Consider that for what it’s worth…

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

****So I just covered the Pauline Privilege, which is not an anullment, briefly in my instruction.

Any comments from the Canon law experts?

While not an expert in canon law I do deal with it on occasion. What comments are you looking for?

 

[TrueLight]

While not an expert in canon law I do deal with it on occasion. What comments are you looking for?

I was actually surprised when I learned this sort of stuff existed. I thought the only options were decrees of nullity or stay forever married. I didn’t realize there was a dissolution of marriage option.

So this sort of thing does exist? Is it decided by marriage tribunals?

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I was actually surprised when I learned this sort of stuff existed. I thought the only options were decrees of nullity or stay forever married. I didn’t realize there was a dissolution of marriage option.

So this sort of thing does exist? Is it decided by marriage tribunals?

The dissolution of marriage option can only happen in a natural marriage (atleast one person unbaptized). Sacramental marriages (both persons baptized) are never able to be dissolved. Pauline and Petrine Privileges decisions are reserved to the Pope alone (or those appointed by him for that task). Local tribunals prepare the paperwork and mail it off to the Holy Father to sign. The Holy Father’s office reviews it, makes sure it’s all in order and then grant the privilege.

In common practice this means:

Pauline Privilege means 2 unbaptized persons married and divorced. 1 of those persons now wishes to become a Catholic and get married to a baptized person. If the other party from the marriage refuses to reconcile with the person who wants to become baptized then the Holy Father can disolve the natural marriage. This is based explicitly on the letter of St. Paul.

Petrine Privilege means that a baptized nonCatholic married an unbaptized person and divorced. The baptized nonCatholic now wish to become a Catholic and marry a Catholic. Since the marriage is natural and not sacramental, and we know from St. Paul that a natural marriage may be dissolved, the Church has declared that the Holy Father can disolve the natural marriae of a baptized person in favor of the Catholic faith. However, at no time prior to the granting of the Petrine Privilege can the unbaptized person become baptized or else it becomes a sacramental marriage and thus indissoluble.

 

[TrueLight]

The dissolution of marriage option can only happen in a natural marriage (atleast one person unbaptized). Sacramental marriages (both persons baptized) are never able to be dissolved. Pauline and Petrine Privileges decisions are reserved to the Pope alone (or those appointed by him for that task). Local tribunals prepare the paperwork and mail it off to the Holy Father to sign. The Holy Father’s office reviews it, makes sure it’s all in order and then grant the privilege.

In common practice this means:

Pauline Privilege means 2 unbaptized persons married and divorced. 1 of those persons now wishes to become a Catholic and get married to a baptized person. If the other party from the marriage refuses to reconcile with the person who wants to become baptized then the Holy Father can disolve the natural marriage. This is based explicitly on the letter of St. Paul.

Petrine Privilege means that a baptized nonCatholic married an unbaptized person and divorced. The baptized nonCatholic now wish to become a Catholic and marry a Catholic. Since the marriage is natural and not sacramental, and we know from St. Paul that a natural marriage may be dissolved, the Church has declared that the Holy Father can disolve the natural marriae of a baptized person in favor of the Catholic faith. However, at no time prior to the granting of the Petrine Privilege can the unbaptized person become baptized or else it becomes a sacramental marriage and thus indissoluble.

Thanks for the summary of the difference between the two.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Pauline and Petrine Privileges decisions are reserved to the Pope alone (or those appointed by him for that task).

I thought only the Petrine Privilege was reserved to the Pope.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I thought only the Petrine Privilege was reserved to the Pope.

Yup, I mixed that part up. Local bishops/tribunals can grant the Pauline Privilege.

I’ve never had to write one up. I came close once with an RCIA candidate but it turned out that the exhusband had been baptized Catholic in South America so it ended up being a simple defective form case. I remember when we thought the exhusband hadn’t been baptized a fellow priest said to me: “You know you gotta apply to Rome for that…” He was a pastor close to retirement so I just took his word for it. His words were still in my head when I wrote that post. I guess that’s why we say only the Pope is infallible!

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Yup, I mixed that part up. Local bishops/tribunals can grant the Pauline Privilege.

I’ve never had to write one up. I came close once with an RCIA candidate but it turned out that the exhusband had been baptized Catholic in South America so it ended up being a simple defective form case. I remember when we thought the exhusband hadn’t been baptized a fellow priest said to me: “You know you gotta apply to Rome for that…” He was a pastor close to retirement so I just took his word for it. His words were still in my head when I wrote that post. I guess that’s why we say only the Pope is infallible!

Thank you for clearing that up for me.

The Church’s laws on marriage are complex. Just when I think I understand then I find it’s not quite as I thought. That’s why I asked for clarification on who can grant these two privileges. Although I’m still unclear on when and why they’re given.

 

[joanofarc2008]

I don’t believe that too many decrees of nullity are given out - I believe that young people are being given poor formation. So I ask the poster above who is being very verbal against the declaration of nullity process are you doing to help teach things like faith formation, chastity, and vocational formation to youth or are you just a Monday morning quarterback?

I will pray that no one you know is ever a victim of domestic violence and or should have a psych condition withheld during the pre-engagement counseling and therefore need to use this process. They may not be willing to talk to you about it if you have built this kind of wall.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

There is no such thing as a “Catholic Divorce”. A Divorce is under Civil Law, not Church law.

Yes, you can obtain an divorce as a Catholic. NO, you can not remarry if you are divorced, but your marriage has not been nullified.

It does not matter why the divorce occurred, unless your marriage was declared to be nullified by the Church, you may not remarry as a Catholic, without grave sin on your part.

My Parish Choir Director was divorced by her husband after 15 years of marriage (he was very rich, and wanted a younger “showcase wife”). She contested the divorce as well as she could (legally, there was not a LOT she could do, other than to compel him to attend 3 “counseling sessions”, but he went through with it.

She was free to participate in the Sacraments, continue as the Parish Choir Director, etc, as she was not at fault at all. She applied for an Annulment through the Diocesean Marriage Tribunal, and after about a year, it was granted.

Only then, after her marriage was declared to be nullified by the Church, was she free to marry again. Which she did, some 2 years later.

An annulment literally means that no valid marriage existed from the very beginning. An annulment by the Church has absolutely no bearing on Civil laws, although in some cases, you can also obtain a Civil annulment.

 

[Suslar]

God also said he hates divorce.

Well sure He does. And I would think He abhors Catholics living in nonSacramental marriages as well.

While my civil divorce had to occur first, my Declaration of Nullity was necessary for the salvation of my soul. God never asks any of His children to live a lie.

For those who think Declarations of Nullity are handed out freely, please understand that when you apply, there is no guarantee that it will be granted. It is a time-consuming and emotionally exhausting process that averages 18-24 months in my Archdiocese. Yes, it’s been said that Americans have the highest number of Declarations of Nullity – a disproportionate amount compared to other Catholic countries – but consider the materialistic, disposable culture we are living in. People are not formed well in what it means to be Catholic much less what it means to be a Catholic spouse.

 

[joanofarc2008]

Well sure He does. And I would think He abhors Catholics living in nonSacramental marriages as well.

While my civil divorce had to occur first, my Declaration of Nullity was necessary for the salvation of my soul. God never asks any of His children to live a lie.

For those who think Declarations of Nullity are handed out freely, please understand that when you apply, there is no guarantee that it will be granted. It is a time-consuming and emotionally exhausting process that averages 18-24 months in my Archdiocese. Yes, it’s been said that Americans have the highest number of Declarations of Nullity – a disproportionate amount compared to other Catholic countries – but consider the materialistic, disposable culture we are living in. People are not formed well in what it means to be Catholic much less what it means to be a Catholic spouse.