Is my second marriage valid if an annullment was not performed?

[Deacon_Ed]

katherine2:

You interchangably use the terms ‘fact of marriage’ and ‘presumption of marriage’. These are two different things. A marriage does not exist until a decree of nullity is issued. You seem to lack an understand of the Catholic theology of marriage.

Gee, Katherine, since I teach the annulment process to deacon candidates, and that includes the theology of marriage, I think I have a pretty good grasp of the topic.

Your claim that “a marriage does not exist until a decree of nullity is issued” is patent nonsense. The Marriage is presumed to be valid until and unless a decree is issued. Just the reverse of what you wrote.

In the instant case, the woman is presumed to be married to her first husband. That will remain until the case is submitted to a tribunal for resolution.

“Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.” (Canon 1060) The interpretation of this is that the “fact of marriage” exists until it is proven not to exist. I confused nothing.

Deacon Ed

 

[itsjustdave1988]

lefthand36,

Abstaining in marriage is not normal? Can you please tell my wife? (just kidding)

I think you should understand that mortal sin requires full advertance and perfect consent of the will.

The external forum is one that gives moral certitude, an objective judgement. Your conscience (after consultation with the pastor in the internal forum) gives a subjective judgement. Both inform your conscience, but both have their risk of being incorrect. Your subjective judgement may be influenced by your desire to be correct about your first marriage, even if you may be objectively incorrect. On the other hand, the external forum is not infallible. Sometimes there’s simply not sufficient evidence for the external forum to make a certain judgement. Sometimes the external forum simply makes a mistaken evaluation of the evidence.

Either way, if the external forum decides (correctly or incorrectly) that your current marriage is invalid, you are canonically bound to refrain from the Sacraments OR use the internal forum solution (live continently/avoid scandal). Obedience to the Church is meritorious even if the external forum has made an incorrect judgement. We all have our crosses to carry. However, if you choose disobedience to the Church because your private conscience tells you the external forum is incorrect, you sin by your disobedience even if your marriage is objectively valid. The Church has the power to bind and loose. If we defiantly disregard that which the Church binds, we commit sin.

If you do not abstain from conjugal relations, you are canonically bound to abstain from receiving the Sacraments until the external forum process renders its judgement. It can be done, and your soul will be better off through obedience.

Heb 13:17 "Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you."

St. Catherine of Sienna:

He left you this sweet key of obedience; for as you know He left His vicar, the Christ, on earth, whom you are all obliged to obey until death, and whoever is outside His obedience is in a state of damnation" (Dialogue, Treatise on Obedience)

"He is insane who rises or acts contrary to this Vicar who holds the keys of the blood of Christ crucified. Even if he was a demon incarnate, I should not raise my head against him, but always grovel and ask for the blood out of mercy. And don’t pay attention to what the demon proposes to you and you propose under the color of virtue, that is to say to want to do justice against evil pastors regarding their fault. Don’t trust the demon: don’t try to do justice about what does not concern you. God wants neither you nor anyone else to set themselves up as a righter of the wrongs of His ministers. He reserves judgment to Himself, and He reserves it to His Vicar; and if the Vicar does not do justice, we should wait for the punishment and correction on the part of the sovereign judge, God Eternal." (Letters, Vol. I. Letter No. 28)

The 15th century monk Thomas Kempis in his book Imitation of Christ wrote of obedience and subjection as follows:

It is a very great thing to live in obedience, to be under a superior, and not to be free to do as we please.

It is much safer to obey than to govern.

Many live under obedience more from necessity than from love, and such are discontented and easily complain. They cannot attain freedom of mind unless they willingly and heartily put themselves under obedience for the love of God.

Go wherever you will, but you will still find no rest except in humble subjection under the government of a superior.

 

[katherine2]

Deacon Ed:

Gee, Katherine, since I teach the annulment process to deacon candidates, and that includes the theology of marriage, I think I have a pretty good grasp of the topic.

My guess is that you know better but are being willfully crusty in yoru use of terms.

Yes, a Marriage is presumed to be valid until and unless a decree is issued. What is not true is that a marriage is in fact valid until a decree is issued. On that point you are wrong.

In the instant case, the woman is presumed to be married to her first husband. That will remain until the case is submitted to a tribunal for resolution.

I’ve repeatedly affirmed their is a presumptive marriage here. What I dispute is your claim (which I guess you are backing off from now) that their is a marriage in fact until the decree of annulment is granted.

 

[cyprian]

beautiful person,

I’m going to talk to a really great priest who counsels couples in these matters. He was the third priest I went to,. to finally get the facts, actually he happened upon me , long story and the work of the Holy Spirit there is no doubt. Make no mistake that you will come through this fine. Stay close to God in prayer and tell him that you only seek to do his will because he is truly the One having you do this. I’m sorry but Ihave to tell a little. I thought that I could not recieve confession (step one) because my annulment was still going on and our marriage was not valid (married Cath first, wife cheated on me and left and re-married episc).All this time 2 years to be exact, I was attending Mass with my kids. My annulment took so long because the priest handling my case lost it twice. I grinned and beared it as pennance. Evrytime I took my kids to confession I would go in and recieve a simple blessing and many times wept because of my longing for the Eucharist. This priest, seeing my struggle, never told me Icould live in continence and recieve the sacraments. One day something told me that there was a way and so my research began and lo indeed there was a way. i INSTRUCTED THIS PRIEST AS TO WHAT MY PLANS WERE and he tried to to skirt the whole thing. Finally a good priest told me that it was indeed (continence) something that had to be done. The hardest thing I ever had to do was try to explain this to my wife who basically has had zero relig edu, she’s non-Cath and I thought there is no way she will go for it. I prayed my you know what off and finally talked to her and she said she understood and agreed to the brother sister relationship. Look if your living in sin, then your living in sin, remeber it’s not about fitting discipline to our desires it’s about doing what God says. Jesus indeed ate and hung out with sinners, not to ratify what they were doing as o.k. but to get them to turn away from sin. It’s a big mistake to fall into the sugary lovey dovey aspect only of Jesus , and it’s this prevailing symptom of the Church that had me have to wait so long etc. I had 2 priests tell me “not to worry about it” and I said “but father I’m living in sin, no?” Yes, they said, but don’t worry about it. Your husband sounds like a good guy, so talk to him about this being Gods will, and get away from the “I” aspect and how hard it might be. Satan wants you to do things your way and translte God’s word to fit your needs. Offer up your suffering and sacrifice for the conversion of sinners. The power of prayer and sacrifice is real and the most powerful thing you can do. I’m praying for you and your husband and I hope to have something you can work with from this good priest. Keep going to mass, and don’t worry about not recieving, If I did you can too along with all of the other beautiful people on this site that will support you. As far as I can tell you’ll need to go through some marriage classes , get your marriage validated and your on your way. As far as the annulment process, under normal conditions I would have only have had to wait about 1 yaer give or take had my priest not lost my case so many times. It was difficult in the re-hashing of things but not so much in the process itself. You can do it! Peace and love. I’ll get back soon.

George

 

[Deacon_Ed]

katherine2:

My guess is that you know better but are being willfully crusty in yoru use of terms.

Yes, a Marriage is presumed to be valid until and unless a decree is issued. What is not true is that a marriage is in fact valid until a decree is issued. On that point you are wrong.

I’ve repeatedly affirmed their is a presumptive marriage here. What I dispute is your claim (which I guess you are backing off from now) that their is a marriage in fact until the decree of annulment is granted.

Actually, the decree would prove there was no marriage, not that the marriage “is a fact.” Your statement is still the reverse of what the Church teaches…

You are effectively denying the factuality of all marraiges unless they have been declared null. This is not the position of the Church. A marriage that is “presumed valid” is, in fact, valid unless a decree to the contary is issued. This is why the Church uses terms like “putative” meaning “assumed valid” in reference to the marriage.

The *fact *is that the attempt at marriage took place. The marrige is factual even if it is not valid. If it were not, no annulment process would be needed.

Please, don’t invent theology the Church herself does not use.

Deacon Ed

 

[katherine2]

Deacon Ed:

The *fact *is that the attempt at marriage took place.

The there is the fact of an attempt at marriage, not the fact of a marriage as you claimed (but are rapidly retreating from).

The marrige is factual even if it is not valid.

That makes no sense.

If it were not, no annulment process would be needed.

The annulment process determines a pre-existing reality. It does not create a new reality.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

katherine,
To me, it appears that you are being purposly obtuse.

katherine2:

Deacon Ed:

The *fact *

is that the attempt at marriage took place.
The there is the fact of an attempt at marriage, not the fact of a marriage as you claimed (but are rapidly retreating from).

The fact is, the way the Church views a marriage is that the marriage is vaild, period.

The marrige is factual even if it is not valid.

That makes no sense.

This makes perfect sense.

If, lets say, there is a marriage that we know is invalid but an annulment is never sought. The Church would still view this as a vaild marriage as the only way the Church rules a marriage invalid is though the annulment process.

If it were not, no annulment process would be needed.

The annulment process determines a pre-existing reality. It does not create a new reality.

The annulment process does not do that, it determines if one, or both, of the parties were not eligible to be married validly or it determines if the form was invalid. It does not rule on if the marriage was valid. Otherwise every marriage would have to undergo the annulment process.

The only way for your stated view to work is if the Church views the validity of every marriage as suspect.

And then lets end with, we can either take your, katherine (a homemaker), word or the word of Father Deacon Ed, who teaches the annulment process (along with the theology of marriage) to deacon candidates. No question in my mind.

 

[katherine2]

ByzCath:

katherine,
To me, it appears that you are being purposly obtuse.

To me, it seems that you and the good deacon just can’t back down from a previously erronius statement.

The fact is, the way the Church views a marriage is that the marriage is vaild, period.

Views, presumes, etc. fine. That doesn’t change the fact.

If, lets say, there is a marriage that we know is invalid but an annulment is never sought. The Church would still view this as a vaild marriage

True. The fact that the marriage is invalid exists. Nevertheless, it is viewed as valid.

The only way for your stated view to work is if the Church views the validity of every marriage as suspect.

The point is not to make it “work”. Its a fine point, as I said from the begining, but an accurate point which the deacon can’t seem to acknowledge.

And then lets end with, we can either take your, katherine (a homemaker), word or the word of Father Deacon Ed, who teaches the annulment process (along with the theology of marriage) to deacon candidates. No question in my mind.

Both of you for all practical purposes have already conceded to my point, but just can’t get your pride out of the way.

Let’s get to what this is really about. Rules and procedures are neccessary for good order. But some (i’m not naming names!) are so obessed with conformity to the rules, that they raise these to the level of doctrine and articles of faith. People should follow the rules and seek an annulment if they believe their marriage is invalid. But if they don’t and remarry, they have violated several rules and I would guess sinned, but as to WHAT sin they are committing, it would not be adultery if they were subsequently given a decree of annulment.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

katherine2:

Let’s get to what this is really about. Rules and procedures are neccessary for good order. But some (i’m not naming names!) are so obessed with conformity to the rules, that they raise these to the level of doctrine and articles of faith. People should follow the rules and seek an annulment if they believe their marriage is invalid. But if they don’t and remarry, they have violated several rules and I would guess sinned, but as to WHAT sin they are committing, it would not be adultery if they were subsequently given a decree of annulment.

Katherine,

The Church does not specify the sin becuase the Church does not know – that is between the individuals and God. That the union would be irregular and objectively sinful is the reason the Church denies such individuals access to the sacraments.

Sometimes the “rules” are there to protect the Church and Her teachings. Imagine if we simply ignored the situation and allowed even those in irregular unions to participate in the sacraments. How would thast support the sacredness of marriage or the divine command? It wouldn’t. The Church doesn’t play games with the sacraments.

So, call it “pride” or whatever you want – as a deacon I am charged with teaching exactly what the Church teaches the *way *the Church teaches it.

Deacon Ed

 

[katherine2]

Deacon Ed:

Katherine,

The Church does not specify the sin becuase the Church does not know – that is between the individuals and God. That the union would be irregular and objectively sinful is the reason the Church denies such individuals access to the sacraments.

EXACTLY. The Church does not know. And if it was made regular at a later date, it also would at that point say their was no objective sin of adultery.

Sometimes the “rules” are there to protect the Church and Her teachings.

I would say most times the rules are there for that purpose. That doesn’t allow one to confuse the rules and the teaching it supports.

Imagine if we simply ignored the situation and allowed even those in irregular unions to participate in the sacraments. How would thast support the sacredness of marriage or the divine command? It wouldn’t

Well, you’re proving my point. What you are basicly saying is “Katherine, you are right. But don’t SAY that because if people here it, they will take licence.” I’m not advocating disobedience to the rules. They are neccessary for good order. They SUPPORT the sacred of marriage.

So, call it “pride” or whatever you want – as a deacon I am charged with teaching exactly what the Church teaches the *way *the Church teaches it.
Deacon Ed

Oh, deacon. You’ve made it clear that deep down, you understand what I’m saying. The Church doesn’t play games with the sacraments.

 

[cyprian]

I’ll bug out of this one, Deacon knows what he’s talking about. Good luck K. I’m pulling and praying for you

Peace and love
Oh by the way a really good read that will clarify much to do about marriage is J Paul 2 " Love and Responsibility. "

 

[lefthand36]

Cyprian & Dave,

First, Dave, you are too funny! Too funny! I love a person with a great sense of humor. Humor is music to the soul, and lately, I could use a lot of humor.

Cyprian, thank you for being so supportive. That means more than I can express with words. You are right. It not about what I want, it is about what Christ wants. That’s the human nature in me coming out, I guess. I will patiently wait for your reply after you speak with your wonderful priest.

Living as brother and sister will not be hard for me and my husband, because we have two spoiled children that want us to sleep with them just about every night. My husband sleeps with my son probably 6 nights out of each week and my daughter sleeps with me that much, too. We will just have to work on that one night a week thing, won’t we?

So, Dave, I would not be the best person to talk to your wife, because I am probably worse than her. HaHa.

Thank you so much for your help. It really does mean so much to me. Sometimes that is all we need is a little encouragement.

God bless,

 

[cyprian]

lefthand36:

Cyprian & Dave,

First, Dave, you are too funny! Too funny! I love a person with a great sense of humor. Humor is music to the soul, and lately, I could use a lot of humor.

Cyprian, thank you for being so supportive. That means more than I can express with words. You are right. It not about what I want, it is about what Christ wants. That’s the human nature in me coming out, I guess. I will patiently wait for your reply after you speak with your wonderful priest.

Living as brother and sister will not be hard for me and my husband, because we have two spoiled children that want us to sleep with them just about every night. My husband sleeps with my son probably 6 nights out of each week and my daughter sleeps with me that much, too. We will just have to work on that one night a week thing, won’t we?

So, Dave, I would not be the best person to talk to your wife, because I am probably worse than her. HaHa.

Thank you so much for your help. It really does mean so much to me. Sometimes that is all we need is a little encouragement.

God bless,

Talked to my priest. He said best to contact your diocese. Sorry can’t be more help, let me know how things are going.
Peace and love

 

[lefthand36]

cyprian:

Talked to my priest. He said best to contact your diocese. Sorry can’t be more help, let me know how things are going.
Peace and love

Cyprian,

I emailed you a private message. You can check it out. It goes into specific details. To make a long story short, I have begin an annulment process.

Mine will only take about 60 days, because my first marriage was a second marriage for my ex-husband, therefore, it was already invalid, because he was never Catholic, and because he was still married to her in the eyes of the church since she was still living.

My husband’s will take about a year.

Thank you for your help. I really appreciate all that you have done.

God Bless,