Is it ever okay to consummate a marriage one knows is invalid?

[1ke]

Was an annulment granted to the man or first wife?

No. He refused to even apply for a decree of nullity. He has only very recently reluctantly agreed to pursue a decree of nullity.

The timeline is:

• Man marries first wife, then separates but never divorces.
• Many years later man meets this woman and begins living with her though still married to #1.
• Man and this woman have kids together while living together but not married.
• Woman has conversion experience and stops sleeping with the man. Tells him they must be married in the Church to resume relations.
• Man thinks Church is a bunch of bunk and will not pursue nullity.
• A year or so after they cease relations, some situation to which we are not privvy arises which compels man to finally divorce first wife and civilly marry this woman. Reason unknown. Woman sticks to her “no sex” rule the entire time.
• Two years go by and man is finally considering applying for decree of nullity. Not clear if he has applied or is only “planning” to apply.
• Nun and priest tell this poor woman it’s OK to sleep with him even though they aren’t married in the Church yet sort of as a “good faith” gesture to the man who is thinking about applying for nullity and “for the good of the children.”
• Friend comes here to ask CAF’ers about this advice from priest and nun. All but one poster tells it like it is: The priest and nun were wrong to encourage her to fornicate.

 

[Des]

• Friend comes here to ask CAF’ers about this advice from priest and nun. All but one poster tells it like it is: The priest and nun were wrong to encourage her to fornicate.

Agreed. The ‘important’ facts were already given. If no annulment, no marriage.

I see we have a crowd of want to be judges here. The thing is, you must start out with a basis for rendering judgment to do that. I don’t disagree with people simply parroting what the church says on issues one can discuss when given all the facts.

There are no judges here. There are many people who know the basic and easy to understand Church teachings on Annulments and Marriage who are attempting to give this advise to another brother or sister in Christ.

Find me one case where Marriage was accepted without first obtaining an annulment from the Church of a previous Marriage where they were allowed to remain as husband and wife instead of brother and sister till death. And of course this is ‘after’ the fact the Catholic knows she’s supposed to acquire an annulment.

And good for the woman to have held out this long from this man. It clearly shows her desire to do the right thing but the poor advise from the Priest and Nun seem to have placed some doubts in her mind.

 

[StrawberryJam]

How could this woman be accepted into the catholic church considering these circumstances? Wouldn’t they want her to have this matter resovled before taking her as a candidate, or is that irrelevant to acceptance after RCIA?

Or, is she just wanting to be catholic?

I’m sorry if this seems so very clear to everyone here and not to me. And, I am not giving any opinions on what the priest or nun said. I don’t agree or disagree because I can’t grasp the entire story although Ike helped.

 

[Joe_5859]

I didn’t know you’d send your friend directly here to read our responses. I might have phrased my response a little more sensitively.

One one level, details are helpful in making judgment calls, but sometimes those extra details are simply distractions. I have no doubts that her reasons are compelling and her circumstances are extenuating for sticking it out and civilly marrying Joe. We’re not talking about whether or not it was prudent/sinful for Jane to civilly marry Joe. That’s in the past and the decision has been made. I would never presume to judge that aspect of things.

What we’re talking about here is whether or not it is morally permissible to engage in sexual relations with Joe now, a decision we are in a position to counsel Jane for or against. I simply do not see how there can be any answer besides “No”. It’s not a judgment on Jane but simply an evaluation of Catholic moral teaching regarding sex and marriage.

Recall what John Paul II laid out in Veritatis Splendor, particularly the section on the moral act. Certain acts are just wrong. It doesn’t matter what the circumstances are. This is one of those cases. It may be that her personal level of culpability would be diminished by certain factors, but an evil act remains an evil act. Sexual relations outside the confines of a valid marriage is an evil act.

Obviously, Jane can sense more compassion from the priest and nun she has met and spoke with in person about the intimate details of her situation. She is not going to get that same feeling of compassion from us anonymous internet posters. That’s simply the limit of online interactions. For what it’s worth, my heart goes out to Jane. I have a close family member who waited more than thirty years before she finally took the necessary steps to get right with the Church as pertains to her marital situation. Her biggest regret was not doing it sooner. But back when it could have made a difference, a well-meaning priest and a well-meaning nun both told her that she didn’t need that “piece of paper” (i.e. a declaration of nullity for her first marriage) to get remarried because the divorce wasn’t her fault. Was that advice “compassionate”? Well, they assuaged her feelings of guilt (for a time) and told her what she wanted to hear (which didn’t necessitate her doing any extra work nor making any sacrifice). But it led to 30 + years of never feeling quite right with the Lord and lingering feelings of regret. I’m sorry, but I guess I just care too much about Jane to allow her to go through something similar.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

…Nun and priest tell this poor woman it’s OK to sleep with him even though they aren’t married in the Church yet sort of as a “good faith” gesture to the man who is thinking about applying for nullity and "for the good of the children."…

Could someone document this?

It is extremely unlikely and here is why: either the woman is not married and thus is not in unity with this man for life or she is. Now for those claiming these extreme mental powers that give knowledge into other people’s mind set would you answer whether she is in unity or not.

So
**Could you document “good faith” and “for the good of the children” ?

Could answer whether unity exists in this couple? **

 

[Joe_5859]

How could this woman be accepted into the catholic church considering these circumstances? Wouldn’t they want her to have this matter resovled before taking her as a candidate, or is that irrelevant to acceptance after RCIA?

Or, is she just wanting to be catholic?

I’m sorry if this seems so very clear to everyone here and not to me. And, I am not giving any opinions on what the priest or nun said. I don’t agree or disagree because I can’t grasp the entire story although Ike helped.

In the OP it said that she was “baptized Catholic” (presumably as an infant). The way I understood it was that her conversion experience was what some would call a “reversion”, going back to the faith she was raised with. Thus, she wouldn’t have been going through RCIA, she probably would have just gone to Confession and started attending Mass every Sunday.

Also, the OP said that her conversion experience happened 3 or 4 years ago while the civil marriage happened only 2 years ago.

 

[Joe_5859]

Could someone document this?

It is extremely unlikely and here is why: either the woman is not married and thus is not in unity with this man for life or she is. Now for those claiming these extreme mental powers that give knowledge into other people’s mind set would you answer whether she is in unity or not.

So
**Could you document “good faith” and “for the good of the children” ?

Could answer whether unity exists in this couple? **

The OP stated that Jane was a Catholic who was married by a Justice of the Peace to a man who had been previously married. Right there I can see two impediments to a valid marriage: (1) lack of proper form (can. 1108, 1115); and (2) prior marriage of one of the parties (can. 1085)

In order for Joe and Jane to validly marry in the Catholic Church, Joe must receive a declaration of nullity for his previous marriage. Then, Joe and Jane can approach their local priest about getting married in the Church (which could easily be done in a small, private ceremony). Even the priest and nun from the OP seem to acknowledge this. They are not questioning whether or not Joe and Jane are validly married in the eyes of the Church. They know that they are not. They are jumping the gun and advising her to start acting like she is married before she is validly married simply because Joe and Jane are working towards that end (as any engaged couple is also working towards obtaining a valid marriage at some point in the future).

This advice would be all well and good if the Sacrament of Marriage was a meaningless piece of paper or a legalistic hoop to be jumped through on the part of an uncaring Church. I would suspect that Jane does not feel this way about the Sacrament of Marriage else she would not have refrained from sexual relations as she has, nor seek to persuade Joe to petition for an annulment.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

How could this woman be accepted into the catholic church considering these circumstances? Wouldn’t they want her to have this matter resovled before taking her as a candidate, or is that irrelevant to acceptance after RCIA?

Or, is she just wanting to be catholic?

I’m sorry if this seems so very clear to everyone here and not to me. And, I am not giving any opinions on what the priest or nun said. I don’t agree or disagree because I can’t grasp the entire story although Ike helped.

A large part of the issue is she could come in full communion with the church while celibate, or after the marriage issues are corrected. In the other options should could be or attempt celibacy and return to communion with the church but if she fails to maintain celibacy she is back out of communion.

Now the RCIA which is often used for teaching would probably be used if she did not complete CCD, and would not be used if she completed CCD or an equivalent. RCIA is open to all regardless of circumstances, however RCIA is preparation. The sacraments are conferred by the ordinary after RCIA. Thus many attend RCIA but cannot receive at the end of RCIA. They often receive sacraments later after their marriage is fixed.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

The OP stated that Jane was a Catholic who was married by a Justice of the Peace to a man who had been previously married. Right there I can see two impediments to a valid marriage: (1) lack of proper form (can. 1108, 1115); and (2) prior marriage of one of the parties (can. 1085)

In order for Joe and Jane to validly marry in the Catholic Church, Joe must receive a declaration of nullity for his previous marriage. Then, Joe and Jane can approach their local priest about getting married in the Church (which could easily be done in a small, private ceremony). Even the priest and nun from the OP seem to acknowledge this. They are not questioning whether or not Joe and Jane are validly married in the eyes of the Church. They know that they are not. They are jumping the gun and advising her to start acting like she is married before she is validly married simply because Joe and Jane are working towards that end (as any engaged couple is also working towards obtaining a valid marriage at some point in the future).

This advice would be all well and good if the Sacrament of Marriage was a meaningless piece of paper or a legalistic hoop to be jumped through on the part of an uncaring Church. I would suspect that Jane does not feel this way about the Sacrament of Marriage else she would not have refrained from sexual relations as she has, nor seek to persuade Joe to petition for an annulment.

Hi Joe
You have made some good posts but I must note you did not answer either question to which you applied to. The bigger issue is: Is Jane simply choosing between groups of mortals sins?

 

[Eliza10]

Thank you Joe and 1ke for using the info I already gave to help clarify things for Strawberry Jam, and for anyone else that may have been wondering those things. You are both very astute, and explained it well! And yes, no RCIA needed in this case.

 

[Joe_5859]

Hi Joe
You have made some good posts but I must note you did not answer either question to which you applied to. The bigger issue is: Is Jane simply choosing between groups of mortals sins?

I guess I missed the point you were getting at with your questions. What two groups of mortal sins do you think Jane is being forced to choose between?

 

[Eliza10]

…
And good for the woman to have held out this long from this man. It clearly shows her desire to do the right thing but the poor advise from the Priest and Nun seem to have placed some doubts in her mind.

Exactly my thoughts. I have been so delighted with the evident grace of God in Jane’s life, with her openness to the truth of God and obedience to the teaching of the Church. Its just its uplifting to see the work of God manifest in her life. Her choice to live in obedience to what the Church clearly teaches when it is not easy has been such a witness to God’s grace. Don’t you just want to praise God when you see His grace evident in other’s lives? I do.

Then the bad advice from the priest and then the same bad counsel from the compassionate nun - it makes me furious that their error is threatening to rob Jane of her good convictions. They spoke to her when she is vulnerable apparently; I don’t know what new situations have arisen to make her waver. I also cannot imagine what causes the stubborn ignorance that manifests itself so strongly in this diocese, in the teaching so many of those in official capacity of the Church here.

 

[Eliza10]

I guess I missed the point you were getting at with your questions. What two groups of mortal sins do you think Jane is being forced to choose between?

I was trying to figure out the same thing. In fact, I was just rereading the posts to see what I missed, to see if I could figure out what he meant here!

 

[Eliza10]

Could someone document this?

It is extremely unlikely and here is why: either the woman is not married and thus is not in unity with this man for life or she is. Now for those claiming these extreme mental powers that give knowledge into other people’s mind set would you answer whether she is in unity or not.

So
**Could you document “good faith” and “for the good of the children” ?

Could answer whether unity exists in this couple? **

I don’t understand these questions at all, or the point of the questions. I guess I am having one of Strawberry Jam’s moments of confusion with this.

However Joe it seems you understand this because you answered this in post #27, Page 2, and your answer makes perfect sense to me. Hope it answered Texas Roofer’s questions.’.

 

[adelore]

As I’ve read through these postings, I can’t say I disagree, however; the one thing that does strike me is this…Jane and Joe have been Away from the Catholic Church For years and Now Jane in the past 4 years has come back to the Church.

1. They lived together and then **got married while away **from the Catholic Church. Did Jane or Joe join/or attend any other church during these years? If they did, then of course since “some other” churchs see marriage and divorce as ok, this could be where Joe’s thinking is comming from… (not saying that is the view point of the Catholic Church) but Joe and Jane haven’t been part of the Catholic Church…for awhile…they’ve been away for years.

Sometimes we as “Catholics” tend to forget that we’ve had some of our sheep, that have left the church for years and years…and then the Lord helps them to come home, some never come home. So we must remember we need to help them with Good, Loving Advice, to bring them fully back.

Jane seems to moving that way fully, but alas, she has found herself in a hornets mess. By the law of the land she is indeed a married women, by “Catholic Standards” she’s not. This by all means causes a emotional mess. At least understand the “grey” area there.

Joe says he will get an annulment going…well by all means Jane get the papers for him to fill out, don’t wait on him to get the papers…you make the calls if you have to. At least that would be a start.

The Catholic Church wants you back in good standing. There’s no doubt about it, You want to be in Good standing, so the goal is the same.

A question that I didn’t notice if anyone had asked, was has Joes first wife gotten re-married? If so maybe (I’m not sure) that would help things along.

Living as Brother and Sister can be strainful on any marriage…civil or Catholic or not. It’s still strainful as this couple has “lived” (right or wrong) as husband and wife. So the emotional/human ties have been there. They have two children…no matter if the “Marriage” was valid or not, the “Strain on the Couple” without a doubt does affect the children.

My best advice is this…Call who you Jane need to call, get the papers rolling, and then get married in the Church…you will be at peace at last when you do.

My heart goes out to Jane, because even if this is a “hornets nest” people and their emotions are involved and it’s not easy. Jane you are trying to do what’s right…I commend you for that. Jesus loves ALL of us sinners, no one is perfect. Including me.

Continue on doing the best you can and keep Joe motavatied, let him know you love him dearly and he means the world to you. You can keep the love and the civil marriage…going without having sexual relations. It’s tuff, I know, and my heart goes out to you, but keep it going “out of the bedroom” and it could happen sooner than you think, all the paperwork and such, depending on what did happen in his first marriage, it might be a very short process. Until you start the paperwork/make the right phone calls…how will you know…stop waiting and get it going…

May God Bless you and build you up as you and Joe go through this.

 

[Spirithound]

Hi Joe
You have made some good posts but I must note you did not answer either question to which you applied to. The bigger issue is: Is Jane simply choosing between groups of mortals sins?

There is no mortal sin in Jane living with Joe as brother and sister. She is not reneging on her marriage vows because there was no marriage.

 

[Ron_Conte]

The order of events in the Sacrament of Marriage is always consent first, and consummation afterward. The ceremony occurs first, in which the form of the Sacrament is satisfied and the couple give their consent. Only subsequently is the marriage consumated. If they have sexual relations prior to the wedding ceremony, then it is fornication.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I guess I missed the point you were getting at with your questions. What two groups of mortal sins do you think Jane is being forced to choose between?

I don’t understand these questions at all, or the point of the questions. I guess I am having one of Strawberry Jam’s moments of confusion with this.

However Joe it seems you understand this because you answered this in post #27, Page 2, and your answer makes perfect sense to me. Hope it answered Texas Roofer’s questions.’.

Sure, for those who make these strong implications and statements please post the answers to these questions. To make the statements posted in this thread one HAS TO KNOW THE ANSWERS.

***Could you document “good faith” and “for the good of the children” as the base for the priest’s and nun’s teaching ?

Could [you] answer whether unity exists in this couple?

Is Jane simply choosing between groups of mortals sins?***

As what is mentioned earlier the primary issue is a lack of understanding of marriage NOT whether any sacramental marriages were discussed. If you look at all of catholic teachings you will have a great deal of problems finding guidance on the case of a couple who live together, have children, promised marriage in some form ( did they enter a covenant with god?) and now wish to consider themselves single via celibacy. It does not work this way, and there is no direct teaching on such. They are parents, they have responsibilities which result from their actions (covenant?, children, bonding, unity?) Please by all means show a Church teaching which relieves them of these responsibilities, they are not single.

Oh can I add another question just for your thoughts?
If annulment means no marriage ever existed what does a declaration of nullity nullify?

 

[Eliza10]

I didn’t know you’d send your friend directly here to read our responses. I might have phrased my response a little more sensitively. .

Well thanks, and it was my fault, it was all very impulsive. She only briefly filled me in and my reaction to her, after just the little information she gave me, was too strong I guess - too immediately offended, in particular to what the nun said, while the nun is someone Jane admires and respects, apparently. I guess the nun’s words spoken to Jane struck true to Jane [somehow!] and when I heard them repeated to me it immediately struck false to me. I don’t usually jump all over Jane in a conversation and I could see she wanted me to back off. So I posted my concerns about it here. Then I on impulse decided to send her the link, and then she told me how she felt about seeing it discussed, and I guess I was just too hasty about it all.

The situation strikes a nerve with me because I care much about my friend, and as I described, I have delighted in seeing the grace of God in her life and am offended that wrong advice from Church officials counseling in official capacity may wipe it out.

Secondarily, it seems to be pragmatically imprudent advice, as two men posters have already pointed out here. I dread the fallout of that error for Jane - while realizing these are all decisions one must make personally and I am not responsible for the decisions she makes.

It strikes a nerve with me personally becasue I am Catholic and I am in this Diocese and when a Priest or a nun teaches that what is wrong is right, when it is their responsibility to teach what the Chruch teaches, I feel* personally offended*! Does this make sense??

One one level, details are helpful in making judgment calls, but sometimes those extra details are simply distractions. I have no doubts that her reasons are compelling and her circumstances are extenuating for sticking it out and civilly marrying Joe. We’re not talking about whether or not it was prudent/sinful for Jane to civilly marry Joe. That’s in the past and the decision has been made. I would never presume to judge that aspect of things. .

Thank you. You are wise.

What we’re talking about here is whether or not it is morally permissible to engage in sexual relations with Joe now, a decision we are in a position to counsel Jane for or against. I simply do not see how there can be any answer besides “No”. It’s not a judgment on Jane but simply an evaluation of Catholic moral teaching regarding sex and marriage. .

Yes. Its that simple really. Yet, the nun has convincingly explained to Jane that “some people” - that would mean you and me and all those who posted here except Texas Roofer - are just “too black and white”, and unlike this nun herself and and unlike God, lack compassion for people in extenuating real-life situations like Jane’s.

Recall what John Paul II laid out in Veritatis Splendor, particularly the section on the moral act. Certain acts are just wrong. It doesn’t matter what the circumstances are. This is one of those cases. It may be that her personal level of culpability would be diminished by certain factors, but an evil act remains an evil act. Sexual relations outside the confines of a valid marriage is an evil act…

Yes. But somehow, the nun has successfully (to some degree) presented the idea that this kind of thinking if “black and white”.

[Continued in next post]

 

[Eliza10]

[continued]

Obviously, Jane can sense more compassion from the priest and nun she has met and spoke with in person about the intimate details of her situation. She is not going to get that same feeling of compassion from us anonymous internet posters. That’s simply the limit of online interactions. For what it’s worth, my heart goes out to Jane. I have a close family member who waited more than thirty years before she finally took the necessary steps to get right with the Church as pertains to her marital situation. Her biggest regret was not doing it sooner. But back when it could have made a difference, a well-meaning priest and a well-meaning nun both told her that she didn’t need that "piece of paper" (i.e. a declaration of nullity for her first marriage) to get remarried because the divorce wasn’t her fault. Was that advice “compassionate”? Well,*** they assuaged her feelings of guilt (for a time) and told her what she wanted to hear (which didn’t necessitate her doing any extra work nor making any sacrifice)***. But it led to 30 + years of never feeling quite right with the Lord and lingering feelings of regret. I’m sorry, but I guess I just care too much about Jane to allow her to go through something similar.

Thank you. I do think your advice, and mine, is more compassioante and I think that the nun is offering a false compassion (as well as, as we have said, pragmatically imprudent advice!). It seems as if the nun is on a personal mission to perpetuate her own theology, and that my friend is simply a case-in-point justifying her personal belief system on how “Catholicism should be instead”, personal beliefs which have certainly been challenged before, by those “black and white people”. And I bristle at that personal judgement!!

It is so interesting that your close family member had a similiar situation of bad advice froma priest and a nun! Where does this come from??? Its the same sort of thing Jane is being told. Its not your fault, God understands that, and thats why you don’t have to follow the silly rules of the Church in your “special” circumstances. Thank you for sharing that story. Yes, 30 + years of lingering regret and never feeling quite right withthe Lord. That is not what I would like to see happen to Jane.

Jane has a true relationship with our Lord and I have hope that through prayer she will make the right decision. If she does not I will just entrust God to help her see in His time. We all have free will.