C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Nothing you stated is correct.
- Status
V
Vincent1984
Guest
This is complete, unmitigated nonsense. I have no idea where you are dreaming this stuff up from, but please stop it as it’s rather unhelpful. Are you even trying to present the Church’s teachings, or are you instead trying to give your own ideas of what the Church should teach?
There is no indication that any of the exceptions listed apply to this case, so marriage before civil authorities alone is canonically invalid.
I also don’t know why you are bringing annulments into the issue, which just seems to be confusing you further. If you are referring to canon 1060’s presumption that marriage enjoys the favor of the law, be aware that is referring to the canonical process. It does not mean that a marriage is valid until declared invalid. It means that for certain purposes, the marriage should be treated as valid until declared invalid. Either the marriage is valid, or it is not. The declaration of invalidity (“annulment”) does not change the facts. It merely overturns the legal presumption. If the union is canonically invalid for the reasons noted above, then it is invalid. True, the parties could not contract a new union with other persons without resolving the outstanding issue of the first ‘wedding’. But the facts remain; it is valid, or it is not valid.
You are correct that, if this couple’s union were ever to be impugned before an an ecclesiastical tribunal, it would enjoy the favor of the law … until proven otherwise in a fairly simple defectus formæ case. But if a party to a marriage (like the OP) is concerned or indeed certain that it is invalid, then that party is quite right to attempt to rectify the situation.
CuriousSeed:
If you are so confident that the union is already sacramentally valid, why are you even suggesting convalidation? Furthermore:
In any case, the the OP is looking for is validation, not convalidation. Convalidation is renewal of consent where there was a diriment impediment at the time of the first wedding ceremony. Here, the problem is not defective consent but defect of form.
CuriousSeed:
There are many well-informed Catholics who will challenge you…
N
Nate13
Guest
@bonnie0187
I’m not going to try and weed through all the other responses, I’m just going to answer your original question directly.
Yes you are assumed validly married in the eyes of the Church. You are not sacramentally married though. That is what the convalidation process will do for you.
If you divorced and wanted to marry someone else in the Church right now they would tell you no, unless your past marriage met the requirements for an annulment. In other words yes your marriage is recognized by the Church as a valid marriage, just not a sacramental one. I hope this clarifies some things. What you are missing right now is the sacramental graces that come from being married in the Church.
I’m not going to try and weed through all the other responses, I’m just going to answer your original question directly.
Yes you are assumed validly married in the eyes of the Church. You are not sacramentally married though. That is what the convalidation process will do for you.
If you divorced and wanted to marry someone else in the Church right now they would tell you no, unless your past marriage met the requirements for an annulment. In other words yes your marriage is recognized by the Church as a valid marriage, just not a sacramental one. I hope this clarifies some things. What you are missing right now is the sacramental graces that come from being married in the Church.
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
V
Vincent1984
Guest
No. Canon 1108 affects validity. Therefore, attempted marriage by a Catholic outside the Church is invalid.
Furthermore, where have you got this idea that you can separate validity from sacramentality? Yes, they two are different concepts, but if both parties are baptised (I’m assuming they are), then
Nate, your comment would be (mostly) accurate if we were talking about the civil wedding of a baptized non-Catholic to a nonbaptized person, or between two nonbaptized. In that case the marriage would be valid, but not sacramental. The sacramental ‘upgrade’ would come when the pagan(s) were baptized; validation/convalidation would not be required or possible.
As this involves at least one Catholic, then canonical form is required. If both are baptized, then sacramentality is tied to validity.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
The Church holds that vows of marriage are a sacrament between God, man, and woman.
All legal marriages are valid, unless proven not valid [Canon 1060].
Catholics married in a civil marriage are considered in a valid marriage, unless proven to not be in a valid marriage.
Proven to a diocesan tribunal, by petitioners seeking a declaration of nullity.
The fact of at least one Catholic being married in a civil ceremony, absent of an ordinary or dispensation, does not make for proof, in itself.
Canon 1108 tells what is necessary to be valid.
Canon 1108 may be applicable and chosen to be presented as proof.
But proof is only what is accepted, as proof, by a tribunal.
No petition means no presentation of proof; no presentation of proof means no acceptance of proof; no acceptance of proof means no annulment; no annulment means no declaration of nullity; no declaration of nullity means the marriage is valid.
In short, no petition means valid.
All legal marriages are valid, unless proven not valid [Canon 1060].
Catholics married in a civil marriage are considered in a valid marriage, unless proven to not be in a valid marriage.
Proven to a diocesan tribunal, by petitioners seeking a declaration of nullity.
The fact of at least one Catholic being married in a civil ceremony, absent of an ordinary or dispensation, does not make for proof, in itself.
Canon 1108 tells what is necessary to be valid.
Canon 1108 may be applicable and chosen to be presented as proof.
But proof is only what is accepted, as proof, by a tribunal.
No petition means no presentation of proof; no presentation of proof means no acceptance of proof; no acceptance of proof means no annulment; no annulment means no declaration of nullity; no declaration of nullity means the marriage is valid.
In short, no petition means valid.
P
Phemie
Guest
To Phemie:
Annulment is the legal term.
Please show me where you find that term in Canon Law.
All legal marriages are recognized by the Church, between non-coerced conscientious consenting life-committed heterosexuals seeking progeny, vowing as such, one to the other.
Not if the one or both are Catholics married civilly without a dispensation from canonical form. In fact the Church clarified long ago that a putative marriage only exists for Catholics if they married according to ecclesiastic law.
Married couples can participate fully in the Sacraments, including the Eucharist.
V
Vincent1984
Guest
In short, no petition means legally presumed valid for the purposes of trying to free oneself from a marriage. The OP is quite right to attempt to rectify her situation, when the obvious facts lead to the inescapable conclusion that something is not right. No one here is suggesting that she can, on her own authority, ignore her civil husband. I am saying that she is quite right to follow both her conscience and the very obvious facts, and seek validation of her union through the proper route in the Church.
You seem to have a rather simplistic understanding of c.1060. It does not say that unimpugned marriages are valid; it says they are presumed valid in law. The validity or otherwise of a marriage is an underlying fact which a Tribunal cannot change. The Tribunal merely makes a judgement on behalf of the Church, on the basis of available evidence. If it was valid before, it remains valid; if it was invalid before, it remains invalid.
How does your homebrew canonistics explain c.1160?
This explicitly states that marriages which were defective because of form (i.e. outside the Church) are not valid, and must be “contracted anew” (i.e. as though for the first time) in proper form. How do you square that with your idea that there is basically no such thing as defect of form?
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
Annulment is the legal term for the process of declaration of nullity.
The term is not used in Canon Law.
The terms valid and invalid are used, by are undefined.
The Code states what is valid and what is not valid, without defining the meaning of valid or invalid.
The meaning of those terms are expressed by the decree of nullity, in the annulment process.
All marriages are valid, unless accepted proven invalid by a tribunal that was petitioned.
This presumption is true for all legal marriages, including for Catholics, including all civil marriages, without benefit of dispensation or witness of an ordianary.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
The Catholic Church views ALL legal marriages as valid, unless PROVEN not valid [Canon 1060].
To be proven not valid, proof is required.
What is proof?
Proof is what is accepted as proof.
Accepted by whom or by what?
Accepted by an ecclesiastical tribunal, as proof.
In other words, presentation alone, by the petitioners, does not constitute proof.
Only what is accepted as proof, from the presentation, is proof.
Only by declaring nullity does the marriage become invalid, during the annulment process.
Once the marriage is null, Canon 1160 shows what is necessary to become valid.
Again, all legal marriages are valid, until declared null.
To be proven not valid, proof is required.
What is proof?
Proof is what is accepted as proof.
Accepted by whom or by what?
Accepted by an ecclesiastical tribunal, as proof.
In other words, presentation alone, by the petitioners, does not constitute proof.
Only what is accepted as proof, from the presentation, is proof.
Only by declaring nullity does the marriage become invalid, during the annulment process.
Once the marriage is null, Canon 1160 shows what is necessary to become valid.
Again, all legal marriages are valid, until declared null.
B
bonnie0187
Guest
I have been in contact with a local priest and have been told that I will still be able to have a “typical” wedding and go through the same process as other individuals do to be married with the church. I appreciate everyone’s help with this process/my question.
We just want to make sure that we make it right and that the proper ways are completed and met to be honored by our church and faith
M
maryjk
Guest
Sounds like you are on the right track.I have been in contact with a local priest and have been told that I will still be able to have a “typical” wedding and go through the same process as other individuals do to be married with the church. I appreciate everyone’s help with this process/my question.
We just want to make sure that we make it right and that the proper ways are completed and met to be honored by our church and faith
Our Convalidation was very simple. But we had been married civilly for 11 years and we had a son.
But like you, we were told that we could do it as big or as small as we wanted.
C
Curious_Seed
Guest
I have been in contact with a local priest and have been told that I will still be able to have a “typical” wedding and go through the same process as other individuals do to be married with the church. I appreciate everyone’s help with this process/my question.
We just want to make sure that we make it right and that the proper ways are completed and met to be honored by our church and faith
:clapping:
V
Vincent1984
Guest
I feel like I’m banging my head against a brick wall. A little knowledge is, sometimes, a dangerous thing…
Nothing can make a marriage become invalid. Either it was invalid from the beginning, or it was not. That fact is not changed by “the annulment process”.
A declaration of nullity merely gives the parties permission to act as though it is invalid.
I really have no idea where you are getting this bizarre misunderstanding of canon 1060. Marriage “enjoys the favor of the law”; that does not mean it is always valid. If there is reason to believe that it is invalid, it should be validated.
V
Vincent1984
Guest
Well done, I am happy for youI have been in contact with a local priest and have been told that I will still be able to have a “typical” wedding and go through the same process as other individuals do to be married with the church. I appreciate everyone’s help with this process/my question.
We just want to make sure that we make it right and that the proper ways are completed and met to be honored by our church and faith
V
ValPal
Guest
That’s not what Canon 1060 says:
In this case regarding a Catholic party, there is no doubt about the invalidity, so it doesn’t possess the favor of law.
,
This is absolutely false, and absolutely contrary to what the Church teaches. Don’t believe me; call your bishop’s office for clarification.
The Church will recognize that a civil marriage is in place, but that has nothing to do with what the Church refers to as marriage.
Lack of form cases are administrative cases.
P
Phemie
Guest
No, the Church has already clarified that a Catholic is not in a putative marriage unless that marriage was celebrated according to canonical form. That means that the civil marriage of a Catholic is not presumed valid unless a dispensation was obtained. If it’s not presumed valid, no ‘annulment’ is necessary.The Catholic Church views ALL legal marriages as valid, unless PROVEN not valid [Canon 1060].
To be proven not valid, proof is required.
What is proof?
Proof is what is accepted as proof.
Accepted by whom or by what?
Accepted by an ecclesiastical tribunal, as proof.
In other words, presentation alone, by the petitioners, does not constitute proof.
Only what is accepted as proof, from the presentation, is proof.
Only by declaring nullity does the marriage become invalid, during the annulment process.
Once the marriage is null, Canon 1160 shows what is necessary to become valid.
Again, all legal marriages are valid, until declared null.
- Status