Marital status?

[Pug]

Believe it or not, I know this sounds like the classic “I’m asking for a friend”, but in this case I actually am, someone close to me. She doesn’t want to know this info specifically, but I do, for my own reasons, some revolving around the children involved and others around my interpretation of the justice of the Church’s marriage laws. I myself was married in my childhood parish church where I received every single sacrament, so my marriage is probably pretty ironclad, for better or worse .

Sorry for talking like it was you! Since you know her well, you might consider nudging her into talking to a priest about the irregular marriage situation, since she is still Catholic. Such conversations need more tact that I clearly have, though.

Getting a declaration of nullity for a JOP marriage will not make the children be treated in a lesser way by the Church. I know that is a big concern for folks. The declaration of nullity lets the person be free to marry. It does not say the children are illegitimate civilly. (unless some country out there has some law that takes into account Church annulments, but they don’t around here)

 

[Phemie]

Sorry for talking like it was you! Since you know her well, you might consider nudging her into talking to a priest about the irregular marriage situation, since she is still Catholic. Such conversations need more tact that I clearly have, though.

Getting a declaration of nullity for a JOP marriage will not make the children be treated in a lesser way by the Church. I know that is a big concern for folks. The declaration of nullity lets the person be free to marry. It does not say the children are illegitimate civilly. (unless some country out there has some law that takes into account Church annulments, but they don’t around here)

A child born of a putative marriage (one that was celebrated according to form or with a dispensation from form and was thought valid but turned out not to be) is considered legitimate.

A child born of an invalid marriage (one such as the OP describes) is not considered legitimate by the Church. There are canons to that effect (canons 1137-1140). The child would be legitimated if the parents married.

That the Church does not deem that child legitimate would have zero effect on that child’s life in the Church today. But that wasn’t always the case.

 

[NSFrame]

There actually have been some problems with getting the children baptized, so it’s not clear-cut for the children in the Church either.

I guess the long and the short of it is, the Church does not consider her married, unless she wants to marry in the Church, at which point she would need to administratively nullify the civil marriages to prove she is not married. Is this correct?

 

[Phemie]

There actually have been some problems with getting the children baptized, so it’s not clear-cut for the children in the Church either.

I guess the long and the short of it is, the Church does not consider her married, unless she wants to marry in the Church, at which point she would need to administratively nullify the civil marriages to prove she is not married. Is this correct?

She shows the marriage documents, the divorce papers and the recent certificate of Baptism which shows no recorded marriage and the Tribunal will confirm that she’s free to marry. She can either marry the guy she’s with now or separate and divorce him and then have both marriages dealt with and marry someone else.

 

[NSFrame]

I still am not sure about the main question:

In the Church’s eyes, is she married or not?

If yes, then to whom, husband 1 or 2?

 

[Phemie]

I still am not sure about the main question:

In the Church’s eyes, is she married or not?

If yes, then to whom, husband 1 or 2?

No, because she married outside the Church both time, she is not married as far as the Church is concerned.

Should she want to marry in the Church she would need to prove she’s free to marry, as we all do. The way for her to prove it is to provide the documents listed above.

I proved it by doing it in the parish where I’d always lived and where everyone knew me. Banns were published and no one came forward to say there were no impediments.

Today couples often have to prove it by providing a letter from their parents saying that they are free to marry.

 

[Pug]

A child born of a putative marriage (one that was celebrated according to form or with a dispensation from form and was thought valid but turned out not to be) is considered legitimate.

A child born of an invalid marriage (one such as the OP describes) is not considered legitimate by the Church. There are canons to that effect (canons 1137-1140). The child would be legitimated if the parents married.

That the Church does not deem that child legitimate would have zero effect on that child’s life in the Church today. But that wasn’t always the case.

That is what I said, the child experiences no consequences in the Church from a parent securing a defect of form decree of nullity. Obtaining a decree of nullity due to defect of form changes the status of the children not one bit, as far as I know. They already had the status of being illegitimate (as considered by canon law, not civil law) before the parent secures the decree. The only type of consequences I can think of *might *be *civil *consequences, in some particular laws of a country (not the Church). I know of no such consequences in the US.

Yes indeed being illegitimate used to matter in the Church and there are still words about illegitimacy in the code of canon law, and the children from both marriages are illegitimate, but that has no effect now for them in the Church. For example, it used to interfere with entering the priesthood.

The children of the second marriage can be made legitimate in canon law by a convalidation of that marriage.

To NSFrame,

She is not married to either man. She is unmarried. However, she is not free to marry, not without the decree(s) of nullity.

The problem with getting children baptized is due to a current state of affairs, namely how the parents are currently choosing to live or not live according to church law and a priest’s perception of it (I imagine that is the hypothetical situation you mean), not due to the circumstances of the children’s birth itself. If the children remain illegitimate, that is not an impediment to being baptized. Illegitimate children can be baptized. But priests often make a judgment call that this month the parents are not living in a way that indicates that the kids will be taught the faith, so no baptism this month. The priest should help the parents understand and modify that, so that the children will be taught the faith. If next month the parents are behaving differently, then baptism is next month. It would seem that having sex outside of marriage is one of the behavior issues that might trigger a priest to hesitate or delay baptism. But this would be an issue for legitimate children as well. The issue is what the priest thinks about what the parent’s *current *behavior means.

 

[Elizium23]

She is free to marry because both marriages are not even putatively valid. Some dioceses have “processes” by which they affirm that the lack of form causes the marriages to be null, and may have particular law to this effect, but there is no universal law that would obstruct a valid Catholic marriage from being contracted by a Catholic who was civilly married, civilly divorced, and has no record of any marriage on her baptismal certificate.

There can be no “decree of nullity” because there is no presumption of validity for a lack of form case.

 

[Pug]

She is free to marry because both marriages are not even putatively valid. Some dioceses have “processes” by which they affirm that the lack of form causes the marriages to be null, and may have particular law to this effect, but there is no universal law that would obstruct a valid Catholic marriage from being contracted by a Catholic who was civilly married, civilly divorced, and has no record of any marriage on her baptismal certificate.

There can be no “decree of nullity” because there is no presumption of validity for a lack of form case.

My diocese calls one of their pieces of paper the Petition for Declaration of Nullity for Marriage Attempted Outside the Church. That is why I call it a declaration of nullity (or I often use the word decree by mistake). It could be called a lot of things, or not required at all, I imagine. But some establishment or process or check or whatever would be.

You are right as far as I know it is physically possible to validly marry without a piece of paper or approval process from the diocese. See CIC 1085 both sections. It would be illicit, though, to fail to comply with 1085(2). I strongly doubt this situation would be encountered by the poster’s friend. The friend would likely experience the requirement for cooperation in some type of paper obtaining or ascertaining process, as even your post mentions (determination of divorce and evidence of baptism paper not having stuff on it). In our diocese there is a small fee as well.

 

[NSFrame]

Thanks, everyone, for the very thorough information. I do feel better that at least I understand the situation fully now. I am hoping I can help her in some way get good decisions made and things straightened out.