Is my marriage a valid Catholic marriage?

[1ke]

thing is, I don’t think a single priest has that authority and duty to determine that

They do, indeed.

 

[Catholicos]

Catholicos:

thing is, I don’t think a single priest has that authority and duty to determine that

They do, indeed.

Pope Francis has instituted new rules to speed up the process in 2015. The priest may have been correct as to the first marriage being invalid due to something like lack of dispensation, but again even under the new rules, that judgement and determination still would be determined by the local bishop, not the priest. IT wouldn’t be relevant what the priest was told, he would not have had the authority to declare even an invalid marriage to be null…

 

[1ke]

Pope Francis has instituted new rules to speed up the process in 2015. The priest may have been correct as to the first marriage being invalid due to something like lack of dispensation, but again even under the new rules, that judgement and determination still would be determined by the local bishop, not the priest.

This simply is not true. And, it has nothing to do with the Motu Proprio issued by Pope Francis.

It has to do with the law as it pertains to marriage, and specifically to the form of marriage and the premarital investigation.

IT wouldn’t be relevant what the priest was told, he would not have had the authority to declare even an invalid marriage to be null…

It does matter. And the priest does not declare anything to be null. Neither does a tribunal in this case. A marriage that lacks form has no standing in canon law. There is no presumption of validity. There is no tribunal process. There is no nullity case. There is nothing. It’s a premarital investigation of freedom to marry.

And the priest certainly can (and in most countries does) handle it. In the US, some dioceses have the premarital investigation handled in the cases where a Catholic invalidly attempted a civil marriage by submitting a form to the tribunal office. This is an extra-canon law process. It is NOT found anywhere in canon law. Nor is there any tribunal process for it. If a priest did not follow this procedure (it cannot be called a law because it isn’t one at all), it has no impact on the validity of the marriage at all.

 

[Catholicos]

It does matter. And the priest does not declare anything to be null. Neither does a tribunal in this case. A marriage that lacks form has no standing in canon law. There is no presumption of validity. There is no tribunal process. There is no nullity case. There is nothing. It’s a premarital investigation of freedom to marry.

Let me see because maybe I’m not understanding what you’re saying. Are you saying that because the first marriage lacked form, nothing else is necessary from the OP because in the eyes of the Catholic Church her marriage today is valid?

 

[Melchior_1]

To be honest, there a very, very easy way to figure this situation out.

He was baptized in the Catholic church as a toddler.

Find out what Catholic church this happened at, and get a copy of his baptismal certificate (not the original, but a copy of it). Once a copy of that gets delivered to you, you have tangible proof that your husband was baptized Catholic. That renders his marriage within the Episcopalian church invalid, assuming he didn’t get a dispensation to get married there.

If he already has a copy of his baptismal record from that Catholic church, then aces!

When my wife converted, she needed to produce a copy of her baptismal certificate to prove she had a valid Trinitarian baptism that wasn’t what one would call a “believer’s baptism” (ie; the symbolic kind) - because that determines if she would be “just” confirmed, or receive baptism as well. When we got married, we both needed to provide baptismal certificates.

Before she converted, I was set to marry her in another Christian church. If we went with that, I would have needed proof of my baptism and get an official dispensation from the valid canonical Catholic authorities.

That’s why these days many places don’t just ask “have you been previously married” or “have you been baptized in the Catholic church”, they also ask for concrete documentation to verify the information.

If he doesn’t have a copy of it and you don’t know what Catholic church he was baptized in (or the church doesn’t have a record of the baptism), then this becomes more complicated. But cross those bridges later; first find out if there’s a Catholic baptismal certificate for your husband. Because of there is and he didn’t get a dispensation, congrads, you current marriage is 100% valid. You can consult others of need be, but without the dispensation and with a copy of his official Catholic baptismal certificate you’ll be fine.

tl;dr - get his Catholic baptismal certificate. If you have that physically in your hands, congrads!

 

[catholiciluvit]

Thank you so much for your help. You are most likely correct in your statement that my friends situations may have other circumstances that I am not aware of and they may not be exactly the same as mine.

Our priest at the time is still a wonderful priest and I have every confidence he did his duty at the time of our marriage. He has always been a very diligent man and priest and works closely with the current bishop.

He made us track down my husbands baptismal certificate within the Los Angelos Diocese, because my husbands parents didn’t keep it. They couldn’t remember the name of the Catholic Church he was baptised in and even had the secretary at the parish stand in as his Godmother as they only had a Godfather present. In the days before the internet that was no small task.

We found it and had a certified copy sent to our priest so we could continue the process of getting married in the church.

This is what happened in 1992. So, we should be good.

 

[Catholicos]

This is what happened in 1992. So, we should be good.

I think it’s looking good. IF anything needs to be done, it’ll be quick and simple.
Anyways I love happy endings in movies, even better when it’s real and lasting. So you guys can live happily ever after , while the rest of us squabble on

 

[De_Maria]

I’ve been married for 25 years. I have always wondered if my marriage is actually valid in the church because at the time of my wedding I was a young, ignorate, prideful and uneducated Catholic. …
Please, someone tell me where I stand and if we need to have our marriage validated in the church?

I guess I was much like you when I got married and worried about it at 25 years of marriage. At that time, my wife and I renewed our vows before our Priest at our Parish. That did much to ease my conscience. I figured, if we weren’t validly married at first, we are now.

A valid Catholic marriage results from four elements: (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they freely exchange their consent; (3) in consenting to marry, they have the intention to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; and (4) their consent is given in the canonical form, i.e., in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized church minister.
Marriage in the Catholic Church - Wikipedia

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm#1647

 

[1ke]

Let me see because maybe I’m not understanding what you’re saying. Are you saying that because the first marriage lacked form, nothing else is necessary from the OP because in the eyes of the Catholic Church her marriage today is valid?

Yes, as evidenced by the fact that the current marriage was performed in the Catholic Church by a Catholic priest who did a premarital investigation regarding freedom to marry prior to the wedding.

Yes valid. 100% valid. Nothing more to be done.

 

[1ke]

OMG how many ways and how many times must the be repeated? The OP is validly married. Stop telling her she needs to “do something”.

Her priest already “did something”. He conducted a premarital investigation of freedom to marry before he married them in the Catholic Church.

It’s done. It’s valid. Stop telling this woman she needs to do an investigation into the validity of her marriage, renewal of vows, or whatever else. She does NOT need to do any of these things!

 

[FrDavid96]

Let me see because maybe I’m not understanding what you’re saying. Are you saying that because the first marriage lacked form, nothing else is necessary from the OP because in the eyes of the Catholic Church her marriage today is valid?

Here is what is happening/happened:

The priest who performed the second marriage should have applied for an administrative declaration of nullity before that second marriage. (I mean that only chronologically, the first marriage was actually an “invalid attempt at”)

He should have done it, but he did not.

The fact that he failed to do it does not have any actual effect–the end result is the same either way.

The first attempt at marriage was invalid independent of whether or not there was an actual administrative decree to declare the fact. It isn’t the fact that’s missing, it is merely the paperwork that is missing.

In theory, one could go backwards and apply for the administrative decree then add it to the marriage file. That could be done, but it’s unnecessary and it would probably do no good but instead just cause more confusion.

Does that explanation help to clarify?

 

[1ke]

He should have done it, but he did not.

We don’t 100% know that actually-- because the OP does indicate that the priest gathered paperwork records. He may have done that and never explained what he was doing to the couple.

And in some jurisdictions, it isn’t necessary, the priest simply files it all in their premarital file in the parish (for sure this is how they do it in Europe).

And, of course, your answer is 100% correct, it doesn’t matter if he failed to do it because it has no impact on validity.