Marriages not recognized by civil law

  • Thread starter Thread starter poche
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What does the Catholic Church do in these situations?
What about in situations where the civil marriage was done in a foreign consulate instead of a courthouse?
I know of a case of a racially mixed marriage where the parties had to go to a parish in another county because the priest refused to officiate at the marriage.
 
What is the morality of a couple who are otherwise free to marry if they marry outside of the Catholic Church when there is Catholic refusal to permit the marriage?
 
poche said:
What is the morality of a couple who are otherwise free to marry if they marry outside of the Catholic Church when there is Catholic refusal to permit the marriage?
Click to expand...
Umm… doesn’t that mean that they’re not free to marry, inthe eyes of the Church?

It’s kind of like asking, “what’s the legal status of a corpse that is otherwise a living person?”, isn’t it…? 😉
 
Digitnomy said:
“Brooke said other counties in Alabama still require proof of legal immigration status or Social Security numbers for marriage licenses.”
Click to expand...
Wow!
I had literally never even hearr of such a thing.

Finally, a legitimate reason to fly to Vegas to get married! 😱🤣:crazy_face:

hawk, esq.
 
I think they may be trying to prevent “green card marriages” (I.e. someone getting married only to gain permanent residency). It doesn’t surprise me that this would be more of an issue in southern states as they are closer to the border.
 
I have known of one case as well, where the marriage license wasn’t filed because they couldn’t get a K-1 visa in time. But I suspect such cases are rare, more because usually you can’t get another visa easily if you’re waiting on the K-1, so it’s unlikely to happen except from visa wavier countries.
 
His_helpmeet said:
I think they may be trying to prevent “green card marriages” (I.e. someone getting married only to gain permanent residency). It doesn’t surprise me that this would be more of an issue in southern states as they are closer to the border.
Click to expand...
Except that I’m originally from California, and now Nevada.

Green card marriages turned out to be far more common than I expected . . .

(Oh, and I want a wall on Nevada’s western border to reduce immigration from California :crazy_face:)
DarkLight said:
I have known of one case as well, where the marriage license wasn’t filed because they couldn’t get a K-1 visa in time.
Click to expand...
Regardless of country, you just marry and file the I-130, then get pre-clearance to go home, not having accumulated enough unlawful presence to create a bar to reentry.

hawk
 
dochawk said:
Regardless of country, you just marry and file the I-130, then get pre-clearance to go home, not having accumulated enough unlawful presence to create a bar to reentry.
Click to expand...
I think the concern was that if they said they intended to get legally married, border crossing would deny him for not having a K-1 visa. If he didn’t say that and then got married, he could be accused of lying to get into the country, which would be a bar to adjustment of status.

Either way, given that the american wife is a lawyer, I imagine they figured it out.
 
DarkLight said:
I think the concern was that if they said they intended to get legally married, border crossing would deny him for not having a K-1 visa.
Click to expand...
You can’t come in without one, yes–but if already here on whatever, you can marry, and take the I-130 approach. It’s downright common for folks to marry while here on another visa, or a non-visa entry. Some are planned, but many simply happen.
DarkLight said:
Either way, given that the american wife is a lawyer, I imagine they figured it out.
Click to expand...
There are some areas of law, such as bankruptcy, patent, and immigration, where being a lawyers not a lot of help, and not much of a head start. Having done two at once was not good for my health . . .

hawk
 
So if the civil law proscribes otherwise fee to marry from marrying one another then they are also canonically not free to marry one another?
 
Those are also the states that had laws proscribing inter racial marriages.
 
poche said:
So if the civil law proscribes otherwise fee to marry from marrying one another then they are also canonically not free to marry one another?
Click to expand...
The inability of the marriage to be recognized at civil law is an impediment to the marriage, but one that may be dispensed by the bishop. The bishop ought to recognize the bounds of justice when doing so, and whether the law is just.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top