Marriage validity question

  • Thread starter Thread starter nebula
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To all those concerned with proper verbage for a civil marriage?, here is another excerpt from another old book: Validity. Having not only legal force but actually producing the effect intended. Applied to the sacraments, it refers to the conditions of matter, form, and circumstances required for valid administration. In ecclesiastical law it means that certain prescriptions must be fulfilled for the law or contractual agreement to bind or take effect."

Nebula, I suppose if you and your hubby pratice the virtue of chastity during your wait, you’ll be growing in sanctity while you wait. You’ll be much better prepared to receive Holy Communion at your nuptial Mass. God bless you and Mary keep you.

Peace,

Gail
 
To all those concerned with proper verbage for a civil marriage?, here is another excerpt from another old book: Validity. Having not only legal force but actually producing the effect intended. Applied to the sacraments, it refers to the conditions of matter, form, and circumstances required for valid administration. In ecclesiastical law it means that certain prescriptions must be fulfilled for the law or contractual agreement to bind or take effect."

Nebula, I suppose if you and your hubby pratice the virtue of chastity during your wait, you’ll be growing in sanctity while you wait. You’ll be much better prepared to receive Holy Communion at your nuptial Mass. God bless you and Mary keep you.

Peace,

Gail
Gail, I know you’re trying to be helpful, but I asked the experts who have authority over my area and they told me my marriage is valid and not to worry. With all respect, why would I do what you say and not what they say?

As far as I’m concerned the matter is closed (I do appreciate everyone taking the time to chime in) unless I hear otherwise from someone in the hierarchy who actually has authority over me.
 
[The OP question has been happily answered by competent authority, but misinformation continues to be posted]
Dear Nebula - I’m glad you called your local archdiocese. A marriage tribunal isn’t a substitute for a Bishop. I think a Monsignor can in his sted, help in the same capacity. Once you’re reconciled, you will need a dispensation to marry your hubby, also only a Bishop can give.
Code:
I know some here think a civil marriage contains a sacrament
, but I don’t.
Do you mean me? If so, my position may be stated more accurately: A civil marriage service can effect a sacramental marriage.

Whether you think so or not. Don’t believe me? Ask your bishop, since you seem to have no confidence in the marriage tribunal he has constituted *precisely *to address this sort of question.

tee
 
To all those concerned with proper verbage for a civil marriage?, here is another excerpt from another old book: Validity. Having not only legal force but actually producing the effect intended. Applied to the sacraments, it refers to the conditions of matter, form, and circumstances required for valid administration. In ecclesiastical law it means that certain prescriptions must be fulfilled for the law or contractual agreement to bind or take effect."

Nebula, I suppose if you and your hubby pratice the virtue of chastity during your wait, you’ll be growing in sanctity while you wait. You’ll be much better prepared to receive Holy Communion at your nuptial Mass. God bless you and Mary keep you.

Peace,

Gail
It seems you continue to misunderstand the situation, or you are seriously misinformed.

The OP has been assured by competent authority that she has a valid marriage. It has legal force and produces the intended effect. It is not a sacramental marriage.

I have never heard the term “nuptial Mass” used to describe anything other than one where a wedding takes place. As things stands, the OP will be unable to have a nuptial Mass as long as her current husband lives. 😉

The OP cannot have a sacramental marriage with her current husband even if she tried, unless he choses to be baptized.

tee
 
tee has described the situation perfectly :).
:o Actually, he was mistaken (in at least this bit, if not more) :o
As things stand, the OP will be unable to have a nuptial Mass as long as her current husband lives. 😉
As a baptized person married to an unbaptized person, your current, valid marriage could be dissolved and you could then celebrate a union in a nuptial Mass.

But don’t go making any plans – Dissolution would require intervention by the Pope. :eek:

Best stick with the guy you got 😉
tee
 
Hey there guys and gals! For all of you concerned with the validity of a civil marriage, here’s another quote from another of those old books: Impediments to Marriage - From the earliest ages holy Church has annexed certain conditions to the matrimonial contract, which are called Impediments. They are of two kinds: 1. Annulling Impediments, or those which, without special dispensation, make a marriage null and void from the beginning; 2. Prohibitive Impediments, which, without dispensation, make a marriage unlawful and sinful, though not invalid. I. The Chief Annulling Impediments 1. Age. Men who have not completed their sixteenth, and women who have not completed their fourteenth year cannot marry validly. 2. Impotency. This differs from sterility: the latter is not, of itself, even a prohibitive impediment; the former is a diriment impediment. 3. Previous and Existing Marriage. This is an Impediment which death alone can remove. What, therefore, God hath joined together, let no man put asunder (Matt. xix. 6). No court, no judge, no legislature, no power on earth, can break the bond which unites husband and wife. For certain just causes, especially for the crime of adultery, they may live separately, but they are still married and cannot marry again. Let it be remembered that no so-called Divorce, no guilt, no desertion, can ever sever the marriage bond. Nothing but a certain knowledge of the death of one party can make it lawful for the other to marry. 4. Difference of Worship. A marriage is null when contracted between a person baptized in, or converted to, the Catholic Church and an unbaptized person. 5. Sacred Orders. A marriage is null, when attempted by clerics in Sacred Orders — Subdeaconship, Deaconship, Holy Priesthood, Episcopate. 6. Solemn Vows. Marriage is null when attempted by Religious who have taken solemn vows, or simple vows which have that annulling power by special dispostion of the Holy See. 7. Abuduction. Between the abductor and the woman abducted with a view to marriage, there can be no marriage as long as the abducted person is in the abductor’s power. 8. Crime. There can be no valid marriage between: (a) Those who during the same legitmate marriage have committed adultery and promised marriage to each other or attempted it, even by a merely civil act. (b) Those who during the same legitimate marriage have committed adultery together, and one of them conjugicide. (c) Those who by mutual cooperation, physical or moral, even without adultery, have caused the death of a partner. 9. Consanguinity. In the direct line, consanguinity invalidates marriage between all ascendants and descendants, whether legitmate or natural. In the collateral line, marriage is invalidated to the third degree inclusively. Notice that in the collateral line, if both sides of the line are equal, there are as many degrees as there are generations on one side; if they are unequal, there are as many degrees as there are generations on the longer side. 10. Affinity arises from valid marriage, and exists between the man and the blood relations of the woman, and likewise between the woman and the blood relations of the man. Affinity in the direct line annuls marriage in any degree; in the collateral line, it annuls marriage to the second degree inclusively. 11. Public Decency arises from invalid marriage, and from notorious or public concubinage; and it annuls marriage in the first and second degree of the direct line between the man and the blood relations of the woman, and vice versa. 12. Spiritual Relationship arises only from Baptism and exists between the Baptized person and the minister, the baptized person and the sponsor. 13. Legal Relationship. Those whom the civil law considers as unable to marry each other, because of the legal relationship arising from adoption, are by canon law, incapable of contracting marriage validly. 14. Clandestinity. Only those marriages of Catholics between each other or with non-Catholics, are valid which are contracted before the parish priest or the local Ordinary or a priest delegated by either of them, and at least two witnesses; except in cases of danger of death or of urgent necessity.

Hope this helps a bit.

Peace,

Gail
 
GailMac,

As I said, your books are old. The current law of the Church, while similar to what you’ve posted, is different. For example, in the Latin Church, there is no longer an impediment arising from spiritual relationship.

Dan
 
lol tee. Nope, I’m staying with the hubby I have. He’s a wonderful guy. If I’m going to have a sacramental marriage it’ll be because he wants to become a Catholic- which could happen. I dont’ think that’s outside of the realm of possibilities at all since he is not a devout Mormon but does believe in God.

gailmac- what’s the point of thtat? None of it applies to the thread.
 
As I said, your books are old. The current law of the Church, while similar to what you’ve posted, is different. For example, in the Latin Church, there is no longer an impediment arising from spiritual relationship.
Also, the rules for consanguinity have been changed, so that a closer degree of relationship is now required in the collateral line for the impediment to hold.
 
Gail, you keep quoting old, outdated books, and then saying “I hope it helps!” It doesn’t help at all, since canon law has changed since that book was published. Quoting it might be of historical interest, but it doesn’t help at all with the current situation.

Nebula has made the right choice, found what she needed from a church official. God bless her as she moves on.
 
Gail,

It’s not a sacramental marriage, I only needed it to be valid. So in case anyone else is confused, the tribunal office did not tell me it was a sacrametnal marriage, they said it was valid. How is this possible you ask? Well as I said earlier, when I formally joined MOrmonism I knew it may or may not be considered a formal renunciation of teh Catholicism I was baptized into and if it could be considered as such my marriage would then be considered valid. That’s how it turned out.

I hope that helps.
i believe the reason that is, is that when y became mormon
you rejected jesus and turned your back on his church for little
less then door knockers and such,
it is very hard to really make up for it i have
read, but i am sure there is something you can do…
 
kev,

That’s a little unfair considering that I didn’t really turn my back on anything since I was taught nothing about God growing up. My parents happened to have me baptized to appease my Catholic grandparents and that’s it. Even the godparents they chose for me were jokes.

So while I do repent of my choice to become a Mormon now that I fully realize and understand the blasphemy involved I don’t feel horrible guilt for it. I’m excited to see where God wants me to go :). I’m sure by the time all is said and done I’ll have plenty to confess besides being a Mormon.
 
kev,

That’s a little unfair considering that I didn’t really turn my back on anything since I was taught nothing about God growing up. My parents happened to have me baptized to appease my Catholic grandparents and that’s it. Even the godparents they chose for me were jokes.

So while I do repent of my choice to become a Mormon now that I fully realize and understand the blasphemy involved I don’t feel horrible guilt for it. I’m excited to see where God wants me to go :). I’m sure by the time all is said and done I’ll have plenty to confess besides being a Mormon.
I am not sain it is your fault,
but the gift granted to you at birth was
squandered, i mean didnt you notice the difference
mormons and normal people, didnt it seem weird
that caffine drunkin was a sin
and that only one type pf people r right?
 
I went into Mormonism very well educated on what it was. I don’t think avoiding coffee is the important issue here. So they don’t drink coffee, who cares about that. The bigger problems are rooted in their polytheistic theology.
 
Gail, you keep quoting old, outdated books, and then saying “I hope it helps!” It doesn’t help at all, since canon law has changed since that book was published. Quoting it might be of historical interest, but it doesn’t help at all with the current situation.

Nebula has made the right choice, found what she needed from a church official. God bless her as she moves on.
Thanks :). I really appreciate your encouragement.
 
I went into Mormonism very well educated on what it was. I don’t think avoiding coffee is the important issue here. So they don’t drink coffee, who cares about that. The bigger problems are rooted in their polytheistic theology.
if you were very well educated
how did you fall for it?
i mean golden plates and people on ships
it sounds like a kids story.
 
if you were very well educated
how did you fall for it?
i mean golden plates and people on ships
it sounds like a kids story.
that’s a different thread kev. Briefly, I ‘fell for it’ because I had all kinds of spiritual experiences as I went along. Also, Mormon theology is certainly ‘different’ but ti’s coherent and answers questions which are a little mysterious in orthdox Christianity. You don’t have to be a nitwit to find it attractive.
 
that’s a different thread kev. Briefly, I ‘fell for it’ because I had all kinds of spiritual experiences as I went along. Also, Mormon theology is certainly ‘different’ but ti’s coherent and answers questions which are a little mysterious in orthdox Christianity. You don’t have to be a nitwit to find it attractive.
i no, but golden plates from god c’mon,
that what cults are they appear to very few people
most of us slam the door on there face
but the people who listen are ignorance to say
the least
 
if you were very well educated
how did you fall for it?
:tsktsk: Careful there – Many would as the same of you or me for holding the Catholic faith. There are legitimate reasonings that can be raised against Mormonism, but simply dismissing it as “unbelievable” (or: believable only by children or the uneducated) is not helpful.
Walking on water and “magically” multiplying food – What’s that sound like?

:twocents:
tee
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top