Marriage Convalidation Frustrations (Not Annulement)

[Peebo]

The Church does not require a decree of nullity in such a case. There is no marriage to be found invalid. Marriages that lack form are not putative marriages under the law.

What is required for lack of form situations, in the US and Canada, is an administrative process where those involved provide the paperwork to show they were married and divorced civilly and not in the Church. The paperwork is sent to the diocese.

This process is not used worldwide. In Europe there is no administrative case for lack of form, if the parties were not married in the Church they are free to marry and the priest handles it during premarital prep.

OK…thankyou for the reply…let me explain further…I have a friend who married in a civil ceremony…neither was Catholic…my friend became Catholic years later…they eventually divorced…he later remarried a divorced Protestant…his first wife had since died…he now wants to return to the Catholic Church…his now wife has no problems with becoming Catholic but they both worry about the annulment process…do they need to go through it…or is there another way…thankyou

 

[FAB]

OK…thankyou for the reply…let me explain further…I have a friend who married in a civil ceremony…neither was Catholic…my friend became Catholic years later…they eventually divorced…he later remarried a divorced Protestant…his first wife had since died…he now wants to return to the Catholic Church…his now wife has no problems with becoming Catholic but they both worry about the annulment process…do they need to go through it…or is there another way…thankyou

His current wife has to go through the annulment process and they then need the marriage to be validated in the Church before he can receive sacraments. with the passing of his first wife there is no longer a bind there.

 

[FAB]

There is no screaming going on. It needs to be stated that what is being presented as being universally required is NOT universal nor an absolutely requirement.

The complementary norm does not stated affidavits are a requirement. It states “where necessary”. It does not indicate what makes affidavits “necessary” but tyically the baptismal certificate of the Catholic party suffices. An afidavit may be needed for a non-Catholic party. It does not say FOUR affidavits are neededa nor that the parties making the affidavit have to physically go to a Catholic church to do so.

And, nowhere does it require a male and female witness to the exchange of consent the latest thing the parish is trying to foist on the couple.

These people only want to regularize their marriage and resume the practice of the faith and they have been given many burdens in this process that go beyond what is required to do that.

The following is the affidavit required for couples wishing to marry in my dioceses, please note the canon notations and that four are required.

WITNESS AFFIDAVIT of FREEDOM TO MARRY
(cc. 1067; 1069)
Purpose: To seek your understanding of the bride/groom’s intention and readiness to enter into a sacred marriage (including convalidation).
Four witnesses are necessary—two witnesses for the bride and two witnesses for the groom.
Witnesses ideally should be family members or friends who have known the bride/groom for at least ten years.
Name of  Bride or  Groom: _______________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Do you agree to answer the following questions truthfully insofar as you are aware?
    Yes  No
   How are you related to this person? __________________________________ Year you met this person: __________________________
   (father, mother, brother, sister, friend, etc.)
2. Does this person intend in this marriage:
   a) To give sacrificially of self for the total well being of each other and the marital partnership? (c. 1055, §1)
    Yes  No*
   b) To accept children lovingly from God and see to their upbringing? (c. 1055, §1)
    Yes  No*
   c) To make an unconditional, permanent commitment, lasting until the death of his/her spouse? (cc. 1056; 1102, §1)
    Yes  No*
   d) To be faithful to his/her spouse? (c. 1056)
    Yes  No*
3. Was this person ever baptized? (c. 1086)
    Yes  No  Uncertain If yes, which denomination? ____________________________________________________________
4. Has this person ever been married at any time in his/her life by a priest, deacon, minister, rabbi, civil official, common law, etc.? (c. 1085)
    Yes  No If yes, how many times? ______________________________
   List the full name(s) of previous spouse(s): _________________________________________________________________________________
   How did the marriage(s) end?  Divorce  Death of spouse  Catholic annulment  Other: ________________________
   If married previously, is this person meeting his/her moral/civil responsibilities to the former spouse(s) and any child/children? (c. 1071, §1, 3º)
    Yes  No*
5. Is this person related to his/her intended spouse by blood, marriage or legal adoption? (cc. 1091-1092; 1094)
    Yes*  No
6. Has this person been ordained a Catholic priest/deacon or been in a Catholic religious community? (cc. 1087-1088)
    Yes*  No
7. Is any person or circumstance forcing or putting pressure upon the bride/groom to marry? (cc. 1057; 1103)
    Yes*  No
8. Does this person have or has ever had any physical, mental or emotional, alcohol and/or drug related difficulties? (cc. 1057; 1084; 1095)
    Yes*  No
9. Do the parents (guardians) of the bride/groom have any reservations about this marriage?
    Yes*  No
   Explain any previous response that included an asterisk ().
   If you know any reason(s) why this marriage should not occur or information you believe should be made known about this proposed union, explain:

---

---

---

---

Signature of Witness Signature of  Priest or  Deacon or  Lay Pastoral Assistant

---

Type/print name Type/print name

---

Parish

---

PARISH SEAL City/State Date signed

 

[maryjk]

The following is the affidavit required for couples wishing to marry in my dioceses, please note the canon notations and that four are required.

Actually it seems like it is the affidavit to be used when required. According to the USCCB, it says, “Where necessary.”

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/canon-law/complementary-norms/canon-1067-the-investigation-of-freedom-to-marry.cfm

On November 18, 1998, the Latin Rite de iure members of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops approved complementary legislation for canon 1067 of the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Rite dioceses of the United States.

The action was granted recognitio by the Congregation for Bishops in accord with article 82 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus and issued by decree of the Congregation for Bishops signed by His Excellency Most Reverend Giovanni Battista Re, Prefect, and His Excellency Most Reverend Franciscus Monterisi, Secretary, and dated September 30, 2000.

Complementary Norm: The National Conference of Catholic Bishops, in accord with the prescriptions of canon 1067 and with due regard for canon 1068, hereby decrees that the following norms shall be observed in preparation of a couple for marriage:

1. The couple should receive appropriate education and pastoral preparation through participation in a marriage preparation program approved by the diocesan bishop;
2. Parties should be questioned as to their freedom to marry;
3. Baptized Catholics should present a recently issued annotated baptismal certificate;
**4. Where necessary, additional documentation (such as affidavits of parents) attesting to a Catholic party's freedom to marry should be presented;**
5. Baptized non-Catholics should present satisfactory proof of baptism and freedom to marry;
6. Unbaptized persons should present satisfactory proof of freedom to marry;
7. Preparation for marriage should be in conformity with the prescriptions of canon 1063 (regarding what must precede marriage) and canons 1064, 1071, 1072, 1086, §2 and 1125, which entrust certain situations to the special care of local ordinaries;
8. Preparation for marriage should be in compliance with appropriate civil laws.

 

[FAB]

Actually it seems like it is the affidavit to be used when required. According to the USCCB, it says, “Where necessary.”

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/canon-law/complementary-norms/canon-1067-the-investigation-of-freedom-to-marry.cfm

My diocese has determined that it is necessary for ALL marriages. A decision by the local ordinary.
With the mega parishes it is not possible for the pastor or deacons to personally know the situation of every parishioner, I would suspect the it has never ben the case.
The only time the affidavit might be waved is if the priest or deacon was a relative. Still, even for my own children I would require it of them, since it is required by my ordinary.

If you read it, it answers a number of the other requires that the people are free to marry.
i.e. previous marriages. Since we prepare mixed marriages of catholic and non-catholics, there is not anything like a baptismal certificate with sacramental notations, so the affidavit is very necessary. Even with Catholic church records, they are not always dependable.

The canon may not say affidavit in so many words, but it does require a complete investigation. I suppose we could make the process more difficult and require family members and friends to come in for interviews, the affidavit works better.

 

[Phemie]

The following is the affidavit required for couples wishing to marry in my dioceses, please note the canon notations and that four are required.

There would have been nobody in my life who could have answered question #2. Never discussed any of that with anyone but my fiancé.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

My diocese has determined that it is necessary for ALL marriages. A decision by the local ordinary.

Exactly.

It’s not a requirement for all Catholics, but rather a requirement of your diocese because the ordinary has chosen this requirement for his diocese. It is not a requirement of the diocese to which I belong (which is rather large, BTW).

It can also be dispensed from, if necessary. I could not find four people that could answer all of those questions. I could only provide two: my parents.

 

[felsguy]

…

 

[felsguy]

The following is the affidavit required for couples wishing to marry in my dioceses, please note the canon notations and that four are required.

There would have been nobody in my life who could have answered question #2. Never discussed any of that with anyone but my fiancé.

In a similar vein:

The wording of several of the questions on the affidavit strikes me as arguments from ignorance, “ignorance” here meaning “without evidence to the contrary.” For example, for questions 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d a witness could answer “no, the prospective bride or groom does not intend such and such” based on personal knowledge. Otherwise answering “yes” in many cases would mean simply “as far as I know” or “I have no evidence to the contrary.” And it would be the reverse for some of the other questions (3, 4, 6, and 7) where a “yes” answer would mean “I have knowledge that such and such occurred” but “no” would only mean “not as far as I know.”

I am not arguing whether or not such affidavits are universally required, legitimately so by a local ordinary, where and how they are to be completed or by how many witnesses. It just seems to me that they would not always be that helpful in establishing that the prospective bride and groom have the proper intentions or are free to marry.

I can see there would be instances where they would definitely uncover that one or the other (or both) does not have the proper intention or is not free to marry. Perhaps that is all they are intended to do?

By the way, in logic an argument from ignorance is considered to be a fallacy or a false dichotomy.

 

[FAB]

In a similar vein:

The wording of several of the questions on the affidavit strikes me as arguments from ignorance, “ignorance” here meaning “without evidence to the contrary.” For example, for questions 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d a witness could answer “no, the prospective bride or groom does not intend such and such” based on personal knowledge. Otherwise answering “yes” in many cases would mean simply “as far as I know” or “I have no evidence to the contrary.” And it would be the reverse for some of the other questions (3, 4, 6, and 7) where a “yes” answer would mean “I have knowledge that such and such occurred” but “no” would only mean “not as far as I know.”

I am not arguing whether or not such affidavits are universally required, legitimately so by a local ordinary, where and how they are to be completed or by how many witnesses. It just seems to me that they would not always be that helpful in establishing that the prospective bride and groom have the proper intentions or are free to marry.

I can see there would be instances where they would definitely uncover that one or the other (or both) does not have the proper intention or is not free to marry. Perhaps that is all they are intended to do?

By the way, in logic an argument from ignorance is considered to be a fallacy or a false dichotomy.

Don’t overthink it the form was prepared by canon layers

 

[felsguy]

Don’t overthink it the form was prepared by canon layers

Shucks, why didn’t you say so in the first place.

Seriously, what I’m saying is that it seems that an awful lot of energy is expended to produce results with questionable value.

 

[SMHW]

Shucks, why didn’t you say so in the first place.

Seriously, what I’m saying is that it seems that an awful lot of energy is expended to produce results with questionable value.

The questions for that affidavit remind me of all the questions they ask you prior to a doctor visit. “Have you or any close relative ever had ----------?” “When was the last time you -----------------?”

No one knows how to accurately answer those questions either. But the lawyers say that’s what we have to do.

 

[Luz_Maria]

The Church does not require a decree of nullity in such a case. There is no marriage to be found invalid. Marriages that lack form are not putative marriages under the law.

What is required for lack of form situations, in the US and Canada, is an administrative process where those involved provide the paperwork to show they were married and divorced civilly and not in the Church. The paperwork is sent to the diocese.

. . . .

Here is a situation:

A divorced Protestant who had a civil ceremony, which the Protestant religion accepts and therefore, so does the Catholic Church, meets a single Catholic. The Baptist agrees to have the marriage annulled. The Baptist and Catholic have a civil ceremony and the Catholic is preparing for the church wedding. Then the Baptist refuses to go through with the annulment and wants a “married life”. The Catholic, even though there is great love for the other person, refuses and within six months they are divorced.

It is my understanding then, that now if the Catholic meets someone and wants to get married in the Church, there would be no difficulties at all. Correct? If not correct, then why? On what grounds? What must be done? People in other countries have to have two ceremonies – civil usually first, and then the religious. No. The couple does not live together after the civil ceremony for they are not Married – that date is not even considered for the wedding anniversary celebrations. It is the way it is done and the Church accepts it.

Your thoughts appreciated.

Merry Christmas!

 

[Chatter163]

The Catholic married outside of the Church when marrying the Protestant. This is a defect of form and would require a documentary case, rather than a full nullity case. to be handled before he or she would be free to pursue marriage. EVERY putative marriage must be addressed, regardless of when and where it took place, before someone may marry in a Catholic church. This is because marriage enjoys the favor of the law. Many, such as the above, may be fairly simple and quick documentary cases, but all must be addressed. The Church takes marriage that seriously.

 

[Phemie]

The Catholic married outside of the Church when marrying the Protestant. This is a defect of form and would require a documentary case, rather than a full nullity case. to be handled before he or she would be free to pursue marriage. EVERY putative marriage must be addressed, regardless of when and where it took place, before someone may marry in a Catholic church. This is because marriage enjoys the favor of the law. Many, such as the above, may be fairly simple and quick documentary cases, but all must be addressed. The Church takes marriage that seriously.

It’s not a putative marriage if the Catholic married outside the Church without a dispensation.

 

[Chatter163]

It’s not a putative marriage if the Catholic married outside the Church without a dispensation.

I assume that you say that because the Catholic should have known that the marriage rite performed outside the Church without a dispensation could not possibly be valid , he/she could not have truly believed that the marriage could be valid?

 

[Phemie]

I assume that you say that because the Catholic should have known that the marriage rite performed outside the Church without a dispensation could not possibly be valid , he/she could not have truly believed that the marriage could be valid?

No, I say that because the canon defining putative marriage was clarified ~70 years ago as not applying to a Catholic unless the marriage was celebrated according to the law.

 

[FAB]

Here is a situation:

A divorced Protestant who had a civil ceremony, which the Protestant religion accepts and therefore, so does the Catholic Church, meets a single Catholic. The Baptist agrees to have the marriage annulled. The Baptist and Catholic have a civil ceremony and the Catholic is preparing for the church wedding. Then the Baptist refuses to go through with the annulment and wants a “married life”. The Catholic, even though there is great love for the other person, refuses and within six months they are divorced.

It is my understanding then, that now if the Catholic meets someone and wants to get married in the Church, there would be no difficulties at all. Correct? If not correct, then why? On what grounds? What must be done? People in other countries have to have two ceremonies – civil usually first, and then the religious. No. The couple does not live together after the civil ceremony for they are not Married – that date is not even considered for the wedding anniversary celebrations. It is the way it is done and the Church accepts it.

Your thoughts appreciated.

Merry Christmas!

Since the marriage was never validated in the Church was not a marriage in the eyes of the Church. The nullity process is called a process called Lack of Canonical form. relatively simple, but must be done before of if your decide to marry again.

In some countries, a Church wedding is not recognized by the state to a couple will get a civil ceremony and the go to the Church for a valid ceremony as required.

 

[FAB]

Shucks, why didn’t you say so in the first place.

Seriously, what I’m saying is that it seems that an awful lot of energy is expended to produce results with questionable value.

The form is to be completed by parents or siblings. There is an assumption that in most cases they would know the person and what their intent is. In the case of question 2, I know my children and to the best of my knowledge could answer those questions.

The turn around of these forms are in the case, hopefully not, if there were to be a divorce, part of the evidence in a annulment. It is one of several tools to see if the couple truly understands the nature of a sacramental marriage as the Church teaches.

 

[Yerusalyim]

If I looked I could. But it’s not worth my time.
The church has required affidavites for years, two for each person.
Two witnesses are called for at the cerimony not including the preist or deacon. Tradition calls for them to be a male and female.

The bottom libe is that the original poster was not haviong to do anything more than any othere couple coming the the church to be married.
Preparation for marriage is a serious matter. MOre important than the dress, guess list and reception. Personlally we need to more, but as the OP made clear he thinks they are obsticals, even though we are working to set a strong foundtaion form a a lifelong marriage.

Canon or not, we require it, so if your getting married, and you want it the the Church, be prepared to do it.

I recently (in the last three years) had my marriage convalidated. This affidavit business is news to me…we weren’t required to do it. In fact, we did our preparation in one diocese…moved unexpectedly…and were married in the new diocese based simply on a letter from the priest that completed our prep. “Tradition” with a small “t” might indicate that the witnesses need to be male and female, but I don’t know of any REQUIREMENT that this be so.