Marriage annullment and RCIA

[michaellavin]

My wife and I were married 30 years ago in the Episcopal Church. At that time I was a lapsed Catholic. Since then I have returned to the Church and my wife has been attending Mass with me each week. She now wants to join the Church but was previously married before meeting me. We are familiar with the annullment process but I have a few questions:
1. What if she cannot locate her ex and/or witnesses to complete the application process? what options does she have?
2. Where do I fit into this picture if I have married a previously divorced person although I was not at the time of marriage a practicing Catholic?
3. I wonder how the early church fathers handled this situation when they ministered to and converted gentiles who may have had multiple wives, any ideas?
4. my wife is very distraught over this cumbersome and red ink process and I am afraid she will loose her enthusiasm for the church if pressed too hard. It seems ludicrous that a convicted murderer could go through RCIA, repent and through the sacrament of confession be eligible to receive the eucharist, but my wife must carry the scarlet letter of divorce without being able to erase it with a simple act of confession. I personally think that the magisterium is venturing into the kind of legalisms that Jesus accused the pharisees of and thus missing the big picture of Love and open arms in bringing a sincere and devout person into the faith.

 

[Just_Lurking]

1. What if she cannot locate her ex and/or witnesses to complete the application process? what options does she have?

Depending on her circumstances, she may qualify for an annulment in many ways, not all of which require witnesses. Even if she does need a full-blown annulment, there are still some dioceses that will grant annulments based on subjective, second- or third-hand evidence.

1. Where do I fit into this picture if I have married a previously divorced person although I was not at the time of marriage a practicing Catholic?

You are barred from all the sacraments (not just the Eucharist) until your irregular marriage situation is resolved.

1. I wonder how the early church fathers handled this situation when they ministered to and converted gentiles who may have had multiple wives, any ideas?

The Western Church was quite legalistic about expecting people to leave their current marriage and return to a prior valid marriage, or suffer the consequences of their disobedience. The Eastern Church allowed people to remain in their current marriages and receive Holy Communion after a multi-year period of repentance.

1. my wife is very distraught over this cumbersome and red ink process and I am afraid she will loose her enthusiasm for the church if pressed too hard. It seems ludicrous that a convicted murderer could go through RCIA, repent and through the sacrament of confession be eligible to receive the eucharist, but my wife must carry the scarlet letter of divorce without being able to erase it with a simple act of confession. I personally think that the magisterium is venturing into the kind of legalisms that Jesus accused the pharisees of and thus missing the big picture of Love and open arms in bringing a sincere and devout person into the faith.

Many Catholics share your opinion, including more than a few bishops and canon lawyers. However, Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II before him were both very much opposed to any type of return to the Eastern practice.

 

[pyro_alchemist]

Don’t give up. Trust God. Twenty years ago we went through three annulments! My wife’s one was pretty easy she was a cradle Catholic who married outside the church. My two were very difficult. I was a twice divorced protestant. I finally had to come to the point where I was willing to leave the love of my life and my (civil) wife of six years in order to become Catholic. Didn’t have to. We will be celebrating our 20th (valid) anniversary in two weeks. Thanks be to God!

 

[Texas_Roofer]

My wife and I were married 30 years ago in the Episcopal Church. At that time I was a lapsed Catholic. Since then I have returned to the Church and my wife has been attending Mass with me each week. She now wants to join the Church but was previously married before meeting me. We are familiar with the annullment process but I have a few questions:
1. What if she cannot locate her ex and/or witnesses to complete the application process? what options does she have?

I think any and all evidence is used to include she has been estranged from the fellow for more than 30 years.

                            2. Where do I fit into this picture if I have married a previously divorced person although I was not at the time of marriage a practicing Catholic?

Well you married some one who was not known via the church as free to marry, so you are under penalty

                            3.  I wonder  how the early church fathers handled this situation when they ministered to and converted gentiles who may have had multiple wives, any ideas?

multiple wives is a different issue. Under old laws the man only had to tell he divorced his wife. Under new laws divorce was rare and usually incurred the same penalty.

                            4.  my wife is very distraught over this cumbersome and red ink process and I am afraid she will loose her enthusiasm for the church if pressed too hard. It seems ludicrous that a convicted murderer could go through RCIA, repent and through the sacrament of confession be eligible to receive the eucharist, but my wife must carry the scarlet letter of divorce without being able to erase it with a simple act of confession. I personally think that the magisterium is venturing into the kind of legalisms that Jesus accused the pharisees of and thus missing the big picture of Love and open arms in bringing a sincere and devout person into the faith.

Well there is a lot here so let’s look at a few things first both of you are welcome in the church’s open arms and neither is under penalty if you both remain celibate. The issue at hand is the lady once said she was married and until death would they part. Now from that point on she was considered married and thus no longer free to marry another. So today we see she was not able to uphold a real marriage. Now there is a common philosophical issue here (and in all these cases) - one who achieves marriage by proper definition cannot desire separation, so those whom desire separation were never really married.

Here is my advice, if you do not go through the process what will you do as an alternative?

 

[michaellavin]

Thankyou so much for your reply. First let me add that my wife’s first husband was not a believer and there were no children. Could you elaborate on the 30 year period that you alluded to, is this some kind of statutory period of limitation? According to your answers we would be more welcome and better off in an Eastern Church. This whole thing seems so strange.

 

[kage_ar]

Thankyou so much for your reply. First let me add that my wife’s first husband was not a believer and there were no children. Could you elaborate on the 30 year period that you alluded to, is this some kind of statutory period of limitation? According to your answers we would be more welcome and better off in an Eastern Church. This whole thing seems so strange.

The fact that they have been apart for 30 years has no bearing on the validity of the marriage.

The best thing to do is to go up to the “shop” link on the top of this page and buy a book about the “annulment” process.

God is good, He makes a way for us to return home!

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

1. What if she cannot locate her ex and/or witnesses to complete the application process? what options does she have?

I asked a canon lawyer a very similar question on behalf of one of my RCIA candidates. She was unsure if she should even try to obtain a declaration of nullity since she didn’t know where her ex-husband lived and hadn’t been in contact with him for decades. He told me that Tribunals encounter this situation frequently and are prepared to deal with it. So basically, go ahead and start the process.

With all of the resources available on the Internet, it may be easier to locate him than you thought.

1. Where do I fit into this picture if I have married a previously divorced person although I was not at the time of marriage a practicing Catholic?

Once your wife receives a declaration of nullity for her marriage (assuming she does) you can have your marriage convalidated. This would allow you to return to the sacraments as well.

1. my wife is very distraught over this cumbersome and red ink process and I am afraid she will loose her enthusiasm for the church if pressed too hard. It seems ludicrous that a convicted murderer could go through RCIA, repent and through the sacrament of confession be eligible to receive the eucharist, but my wife must carry the scarlet letter of divorce without being able to erase it with a simple act of confession. I personally think that the magisterium is venturing into the kind of legalisms that Jesus accused the pharisees of and thus missing the big picture of Love and open arms in bringing a sincere and devout person into the faith.

The Church believes that when she made vows “til death do us part” she meant them. I’m not sure what other stance there could be.

Your hypothetical murderer who receives absolution had to do three things: be sorry for what he did, confess it, and have the intention not to repeat it. It’s that last part that poses a problem for a couple married outside the Church. They need to separate. And reasonably speaking, what couple married for 30 years wants to do that? So that leaves waiting for a declaration of nullity and imminent convalidation before they can go to confession.

Pray for your wife and support her as she takes care of these issues.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

My wife and I were married 30 years ago in the Episcopal Church. At that time I was a lapsed Catholic. Since then I have returned to the Church and my wife has been attending Mass with me each week. She now wants to join the Church but was previously married before meeting me. We are familiar with the annullment process but I have a few questions:

1. What if she cannot locate her ex and/or witnesses to complete the application process? what options does she have?
2. Where do I fit into this picture if I have married a previously divorced person although I was not at the time of marriage a practicing Catholic?
3. I wonder how the early church fathers handled this situation when they ministered to and converted gentiles who may have had multiple wives, any ideas?
4. my wife is very distraught over this cumbersome and red ink process and I am afraid she will loose her enthusiasm for the church if pressed too hard. It seems ludicrous that a convicted murderer could go through RCIA, repent and through the sacrament of confession be eligible to receive the eucharist, but my wife must carry the scarlet letter of divorce without being able to erase it with a simple act of confession. I personally think that the magisterium is venturing into the kind of legalisms that Jesus accused the pharisees of and thus missing the big picture of Love and open arms in bringing a sincere and devout person into the faith.

1. Complete as far as possible and with as much detail as you have, then let the Tribunal go from there. remembering that the more info you give the faster things move.
2. Does not matter if you were a non-practicing Catholic at the time of the second Marriage, you were still a Catholic. Therefore you need to speak with your pastor about your Marriage situation, and most likely should not receive Holy Communion until the Marriage situation is addressed.
3. Most likely the same way the Church does today with the Pauline Privilege.
4. It’s not about “enthusiasm for the church”, it’s about Eternal Salvation! Jesus was not kidding when He forbid re-Marriage of a divorced person to another person who is not their original spouse.

 

[jmcrae]

1. my wife is very distraught over this cumbersome and red ink process and I am afraid she will loose her enthusiasm for the church if pressed too hard. It seems ludicrous that a convicted murderer could go through RCIA, repent and through the sacrament of confession be eligible to receive the eucharist,

If the murderer was continuing to murder people, he would not be absolved of the sin, nor would he be received into the Church. (I had this situation with a drug addict in my RCIA class one time - he would not stop committing thefts, so he was refused entry into the Church.)

but my wife must carry the scarlet letter of divorce

She did not sin when she divorced (in fact there can often be good reasons for a divorce) - she sinned when she began to live with a second man and call him her “husband” even though we are each allowed only one marriage during this lifetime (see Matthew 5:32). She is continuing to live with the second man even until now, which is why she is still in sin.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Thankyou so much for your reply. First let me add that my wife’s first husband was not a believer and there were no children. Could you elaborate on the 30 year period that you alluded to, is this some kind of statutory period of limitation? According to your answers we would be more welcome and better off in an Eastern Church. This whole thing seems so strange.

There is so much to these issues you can never know it all. First let’s start with what “valid” means, it means the participants properly enter the marriage. Meaning** they were ready, understood the commitment, and willing desired to fulfill the comment**. Now the flip of valid is licit which means the church and the celebrant (priest, deacon, bishop) was prepared, understood the commitment, prepared the couple, and willing desired to confer the sacrament, and conferred the sacrament properly.

Now let’s look at the Tribunal, it is a group of well prepared knowledgeable people (on the subject of marriage) and intervening on the request of a single party to review if they should recommend to the Bishop this person is actually free to marry despite having attempted an earlier marriage. They are not omniscience, and they know that. So what do they do? They look at the evidence presented by the advocate, usually a canon lawyer who represents you. That advocate has collected evidence typically written statements both direct from participants, family, friends, etc and various forms of indirect evidence as documented events and phone interviews, etc. which the advocate believes violate the precepts of the state of marriage. If the Tribunal agrees they sign a recommendation, if they are not convinced they refer it back for more detail thus leaving the presumption of a valid marriage to stand.

So what are they looking for? Evidence that one party or the other acted in a manner particularly before or early in the marriage that was inconsistent with a - ready, understanding, commitment to marriage person. So some examples – married because of unplanned pregnancy, married because one wanted to be treated as an adult, she always wanted to marry so she used the first opportunity, one left and never came back, one drank (or drugs)heavy before or during the initial marriage period (not years later), one did not want children, one did not want relations, one dated others continuing right up to or even through the marriage etc… Common misunderstandings: an affair which occurred years into the marriage matters, alcohol or drugs use which occurred years into the matter. These errors of often citing recent issues say little about what was going on at the time of the marriage. Another common error is to believe one must blame the other. Or to hide the real reason and try to use a reason that sounds better. For example the woman can say it was her that was not ready but wanted to marry and leave her parents home, or was in infatuated with him or the idea of marriage.

So in summary be honest and explain why the original attempt did not work, and how that problem was present before the marriage. Be honest the truth always makes more sense.

Now the thirty year part: Obviously if one married for thirty years and separated for thirty minutes it would be difficult to seek an annulment, however in this case we know the couple certainly was not bonded because they do not have any type of relationship. A properly married couple bond, they become one. It is little unrealistic to make an argument that one properly married which requires bonding and has spent 30 years with no relationship to the one they are bonded to. So the 30 years can be used as partial evidence no marital bond occurred. Now your wife simply needs to explain why, what went wrong? Then what happen before the marriage which created a situation where two people who were not bonding for life married.

I hope that helps explain it.

 

[quiet52]

If your wife is baptized and she married an unbaptized person, and if he has no desire to be baptized or support her in faith or be involved in her life, she might be able to ask for the Petrine privilege. Does she have any witnesses present at your wedding or who knew you and your husband when you were married, to attest to the fact that he was not baptized?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

If your wife is baptized and she married an unbaptized person, and if he has no desire to be baptized or support her in faith or be involved in her life, she might be able to ask for the Petrine privilege. Does she have any witnesses present at your wedding or who knew you and your husband when you were married, to attest to the fact that he was not baptized?

The Petrine Privilege disolves an un-consumated Marriage?
Since she is now Baptized the Pauline Privilege no longer applies.

 

[tinalewis]

Hi michaellavin -

Your post hits home for me as I expressed a desire to become Catholic but my husband had been married previously. It seemed unfair that I had been a loyal church-goer for years but could not join in full communion. At the time I met my husband he was lawfully divorced and even our “mothers” considered him free to marry another. As this is my first marriage, I was mis-informed by many who assured me that the church honors first marriages for the RCIA candidates. Well, I was a candidate and this is my first marriage. Uh, they left out some important points . . . .

My advice to you and your wife: Go for the annulment. Take the first step. My husband agreed to seek an annulment before I even asked him to consdier it. We made a pact to pursue it up until the point where it became too painful for one or both of us to continue. Then we agreed we would stop and re-think my entry into the church.

Was it painful? Oh, you bet it was.

Was it worth it? Oh, you bet it was.

What did it take? Lots and lots of prayer in front of the Blessed Sacrament. That’s the only thing that got me through with any sanity left.

And not only do I still claim to be sane, but everything managed to work out better than I could have hoped. My husband had a lovely reconciliation with his first wife, and they healed some lingering hurt feelings. The annulment was granted, and now my husband and I are both Catholics!

These painful situations can turn around, With prayer, they can and they will. And in the end you and your wife will be thankful for the rewards of being Catholic, and all the pain will be only a memory that re-appears when you read posts like this.

I wish you and your wife all the best, and you will be in my prayers.

 

[DavidW]

michaellavin-

I just went through a very similar situation. Your wife doesn’t have to find her ex-husband or witnesses from 30 years ago. What the tribunal will do is ask for witness statements as to her character and anyone else that can help (like therapists or counselors).

Mine was an open and shut case, a marriage forced by pregnancy. Obvious defect of consent and it was right there on the certified copies of the court papers for anyone to read and add the dates between the marriage and the birth. It sailed through in 9 months.

My advice, a bit different from others above, is to get with your parish case sponsor and get that petition filed ASAP. Don’t fret over this or that minor missing detail. Get it filled out and turned in, the pray the rosary over it daily.

Yes that petition hurts. It asks HARD questions. It demands real reflection and honesty and a lot of humility.

The process isn’t set up to keep people out of the church, it is set up to get people IN the church while preserving the sanctity of marriage.