Marriage Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter mwhite0209
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mwhite0209 said:
1ke -

Since she is not baptized, could I marry her civilly to give her my name and it would only be a natural wedding and then proceed with the annulment process? That way her ex would have a hard time finding her with a new name he does not know of should he try to find her. Obvoiusly it’s not how I’d choose, but I’m very concerned about her safety.
Click to expand...
No, you are Catholic and are bound by the rules of marriage. Thus you must be married by the Church, to attempt a civil marriage without the Church would be a sin.

Not to mention, until your fiance’s previous marriage is found null, she is not free to marry you a Catholic, until such a time as it is found null.
 
jilly4ski said:
No, you are Catholic and are bound by the rules of marriage. Thus you must be married by the Church, to attempt a civil marriage without the Church would be a sin.

Not to mention, until your fiance’s previous marriage is found null, she is not free to marry you a Catholic, until such a time as it is found null.
Click to expand...
Ok. I guess I didn’t understand what a natural marriage was. I guess it carries the same ideas of a sacramental marriage, just without receiving sacaraments due to her not being baptized.
I’m just trying to find a solution to satisfy the issue of her safety.
 
mwhite0209 said:
Since she is not baptized, could I marry her civilly to give her my name and it would only be a natural wedding and then proceed with the annulment process? .
Click to expand...
No. A natural marriage is a **valid **marriage in which one or both parties are unbaptized.

Doing what you propose would be an **invalid **attempt at marriage.
 
mwhite0209 said:
Ok. I guess I didn’t understand what a natural marriage was. I guess it carries the same ideas of a sacramental marriage, just without receiving sacaraments due to her not being baptized.
I’m just trying to find a solution to satisfy the issue of her safety.
Click to expand...
Here are the canons concerning which tribunals can handle the case. Perhaps if they married, or he lives, in another location from where she is now the petition could be handled there, further obscuring her location:

Can. 1673 In cases concerning the nullity of marriage which are not reserved to the Apostolic See, the following are competent:

1/ the tribunal of the place in which the marriage was celebrated;

2/ the tribunal of the place in which the respondent has a domicile or quasi-domicile;

3/ the tribunal of the place in which the petitioner has a domicile, provided that both parties live in the territory of the same conference of bishops and the judicial vicar of the domicile of the respondent gives consent after he has heard the respondent;

4/ the tribunal of the place in which in fact most of the proofs must be collected, provided that consent is given by the judicial vicar of the domicile of the respondent, who is first to ask if the respondent has any exception to make.

Again, I urge you to talk to the diocesan tribunal office. I promise you, they have seen abusive cases before in which there had to be care taken to ensure the petitioner’s safety. They have procedures.
 
Just for an update…

Our priest is petitioning the Tribunal on our behalf to not contact her ex since we have all the paperwork and safety is an issue.
She’s willing to go through with this no matter the outcome of our priest’s petition because she doesn’t want to live in fear and know’s how important it is to have a family raised in church in the future. I know she made an error in judgement marrying this guy so young, but hopefully the church will see the marriage wasn’t valid due to the abuse and infedelity, and we can proceed in our lives together.

Thanks 1ke and everyone else for your help. It’s been truly a blessing. Thanks again.
 
larsenl1 said:
People just starting the process of coming into the church sometimes simply do not know what they do not know. That is why I gave a thorough answer about the conditions to come into the church. Immediately following my post that started out “if there was a previous marriage…” the OP then provided more detail.

I.
Click to expand...
I think you are quite right in this observation, and quite right to remind us about charity in our responses. It is also why a complete answer to the original question is not always the most helpful, because the answer usually does not fit the actual situation as it become clearer in subsequent discussion. That results in a lot of side discussions with challenges to the original responses. Also an area where we sometimes excel at breaking the bounds of charity. Your approach is the right one, to gently ask questions that elicit the detail needed to give a helpful answer. In the final analysis, in almost all marriage and annulment threads, it proves nearly impossible to provide the OP with a response beyond “see your priest” in part because of all the misinformation that follows the original question.
 
Our Priest is having us go the Petrine Privilege route since she was not baptized.

I wonder though (and I can ask my priest when I talk to him next) if her ex’s participation is still not necessary for this to go through. I know he said for the annulment it was not, but I guess he never really said if it was for the dissolution of the bond.

No one on here would probably know that would they?
 
Just as an update…

We were granted Dissolution of a Marriage in Favour of the Faith. She is currently in RCIA classes and I am her sponser. We will be married Apri 14, 2012.
 
Just as an update. My wife was baptised at Easter Vigil. We were married the next Saturday the 14th. We both had such a positive experience with our RCIA classes at our church that we are volunteering this year for RCIA. We have our first child on the way due April 4th.

Thanks for all the help, guys!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top