Ligamen moot by death?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pulsar60
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

pulsar60

Guest
A non-Catholic friend wants a “free to marry” declaration so she can marry a Catholic man within the Catholic Church. She (petitioner) had a prior marriage to a baptized non-Catholic man (respondent). He had a prior marriage to a baptized non-Catholic woman (co-respondent). The respondent and co-respondent were divorced and respondent married the petitioner several years later. Petitioner and respondent divorced about 25 years ago after about 12 years of marriage.

On first look, this would seem to be a ligamen case. But, in gathering documentation it was discovered that co-respondent passed away during the course of petitioner and respondent’s marriage. Co-respondent was alive at the time of petitioner and respondents marriage but died before they were divorced.

My understanding of annulments is that the state of the relationship at the time vows are exchanged is the only consideration for determination of validity. On the other hand, my reading in this forum indicates that ligamen and annulment aren’t exactly the same thing. Also, since non-Catholics are not bound by canonical form, the rules seem different for them.

So, the question is this: Did petitioner and respondent’s marriage become presumably valid at the moment of co-respondent’s death? Respondent’s prior bond is obviously dissolved by co-respondent’s death. But, the marriage entered into with petitioner was presumably invalid due to prior bond at its inception. Does the timing of co-respondent’s death matter?

If respondent were Catholic and his first marriage had been a valid canonical Catholic marriage but had divorced and married petitioner outside the Church, he would have the option of convalidation after the passing of co-respondent to make the marriage valid. Indeed, the marriage would never be valid due to lack of canonical form until convalidation occurred. But that is a canonical thing, yes/no? Non-Catholics aren’t bound by those rules.

Discussions with priests vary from “yes” to “no” to “don’t even ask because ligamen doesn’t apply to non-Catholics.” Perhaps someone here can clarify the real rules?

To further complicate things: If the answer is that ligamen is moot due to co-respondent passing during the marriage, at what point would a full tribunal investigation begin? Would it look at the state of the relationship at vow exchange or the state of the relationship when co-respondent died? It’s quite probable respondent and petitioner would never have chosen to re-exchange vows or “convalidate” their marriage at the time of co-respondent’s passing if such had been part of their religious practices.
 
Quick Google search turned this up from the Diocese of Arlington:
The ligamen process seeks to obtain documentary evidence to establish the fact of the impediment of ligamen, i.e., that the Respondent was in a valid prior bond throughout the duration of the Petitioner-Respondent marriage and so was not free to marry the Petitioner.
…and…
The Petitioner should select witnesses who have knowledge that the co-respondent was living from the time of the Petitioner and Respondent’s wedding until the Petitioner and Respondent separated.
It’s a short article that you can find here: www.arlingtondiocese.org…ligamen
 
Thank you #2. Your Google skills are much better than mine. That is the first ligamen explanation I’ve seen that specifies that the co-respondent must survive the entire marriage. I’d done a lot of looking.

That site doesn’t explain any reasoning behind that requirement. There must be some theology involved that eludes me. I was hoping to understand the “why” for the answer. The rest of my question remains unanswered. At what point point in the marriage will the tribunal attempt to determine validity? If prior bond is indeed an impediment, then God must not have been party to the marriage at the time vows were exchanged, at least not to my thinking. At what point did “what God has joined, let no man separate” actually happen?
 
Thank you #2. Your Google skills are much better than mine. That is the first ligamen explanation I’ve seen that specifies that the co-respondent must survive the entire marriage. I’d done a lot of looking.

That site doesn’t explain any reasoning behind that requirement. There must be some theology involved that eludes me. I was hoping to understand the “why” for the answer. The rest of my question remains unanswered. At what point point in the marriage will the tribunal attempt to determine validity? If prior bond is indeed an impediment, then God must not have been party to the marriage at the time vows were exchanged, at least not to my thinking. At what point did “what God has joined, let no man separate” actually happen?
Hello,

The reasoning behind it is that a person’s marital consent is understood to continue until it is intentionally revoked. Even though there was, at the beginning, an obstacle to the effectiveness of the exchange of marital consent (the prior bond), the consent is, in itself, sufficient to bring about marriage. Once the obstacle is removed, the consent becomes effective.

Basically, the Church wants valid marriages. To require non-Catholics to “convalidate” their marriages is thought to be too impractical and burdensome. Instead, the non-Catholics’ natural right to marry is respected by not placing any such burdens on them.

The consent at the time of the exchange of consent is evaluated. Chances are, there was no substantive change from the beginning to the time of the death of the first spouse. That being said, there should also be questions which would ensure that there was no such essential change in the Parties’ marital consent. So, for example, if a Party says “Well, at the beginning, we didn’t want children but that changed a few years into the marriage. We starting trying to have children and ended up with three”, then there is no basis for saying the marriage is invalid because of an exclusion of the good of children.

Dan
 
Hello,

The consent at the time of the exchange of consent is evaluated. Chances are, there was no substantive change from the beginning to the time of the death of the first spouse. That being said, there should also be questions which would ensure that there was no such essential change in the Parties’ marital consent.

Dan
Thanks Dan. I’m not sure that your presumption that there would be no substantive change in the consent over time is really valid. We are talking about a marriage that ended in civil divorce. You continue with an example where a defect to consent might actually disappear over time. I think it more likely that a defect to consent might actually be added or amplified, at least in this particular case (which is what tribunals are all about).

With some assurance that the tribunal would indeed consider the quality of consent to marry at the time the impediment ended, I could encourage my friend to continue the full tribunal process. There are certainly no questions on her petition/questionnaire that directly address this situation. There is the general catch-all “Notes” section that could be used. Hopefully, it would receive due consideration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top