Questions about divorce? Confused

  • Thread starter Thread starter JesusReigns
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JesusReigns

Guest
Hello.
OK, so the Word says there is no re marriage after divorce. And I love that the Catholic also upholds this! 🙂 but I’m a bit concerned about some of its policies and wandering is the church actually not following the scripture? I’ve read that Marriages are considered sacramental if they were at least by a minister (whether Protestant or Catholic). So of course the church isn’t gonna grant annulment for a sacramental marriage, but I’ve also read its considered valid at a court house marriage too. (maybe I’ve read and heard from the wrong sources) but still, how is that the church can grant annulments and now it’s “ok”. I’m not trying to attack, I’m simply concerned and sincere here. If someone’s gets married in the catholic church, how can there possibly be talk of another marriage? Even annulments? This seems to be transgressing the scriptuere low key. I know I’m probably misunderstanding this, but really if someone gets married at a Vegas chapel or whatever, then it’s not considered sacramental right? Therefore it can be annulled and remarriage would not be sin? How do we know marriage with the court systems isn’t valid, considering God put government in place? So God is ok with divorce and remarriage if it wansnt sacramental? I’m quite confused by this.
PAX 🙂
 
Last edited:
You are a little confused. A marriage does not need to take place at a chapel/religious venue to be sacramental (at least in the Roman rite) the ministers of marriage are the couple who confer the sacrament on each other. This means that the only requirement for a marriage to be sacramental is for both parties to be baptized (hence why a court house marriage may be sacramental). The marriage automatically becomes sacramental on the baptism of both parties.

However Catholics are bound by canon law which requires them to be married in a Church or obtain a dispensation to marry outside of it. I don’t know why this impacts validity rather than licity but that is the case. I suppose the nearest example is saying that a state has the right to set it’s own requirements for a couple to civilly marry in it.

The conditions for marriage are:

Openness to life
Free Consent
Faithfulness of the spouses
Permanence.

If one of these is not met at the time of the exchange of vows the marriage is not valid and if it could be proven to a tribunal the marriage would be annulled. This means that there never was a marriage.

Assuming one of the parties are not baptized then the marriage is natural and may be dissolved.

This is granted by the Petrine and Pauline privileges.

The Pauline privilege is based on 1 Cor 7
12 To the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace. 16 Wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife?
Click to expand...

The Petrine privilege is an extension and I assume based on the fact that God does not join the couple in a non sacramental marriage.
 
JesusReigns said:
Even annulments?
Click to expand...
That phrase does confuse people. The good news is that the Church uses more precise language.

A person may ask the Church Tribunal to review their attempt at marriage, either a natural or sacramental marriage. If the Tribunal determines there was some defect in that attempt at marriage they declare that attempt at marriage did not result in a valid marriage. The marriage never happened, the attempt is null.

Somehow we have decided to use the secular legal term “annulment” in colloquial speech and it does confuse people!
 
So of someone for example gets married just to escape home life (because it’s extremely bad and they aren’t following God anyways) is that marriage sacramental? Let’s just say I have two friends in my life. One is a best friend who is a lapsed Catholic but I continue to be friends with him and am basically unctioning him back. However, my other is the one who got married just to escape the bad home life but basically she isn’t with him now. Their divorce isn’t final, and the best friend of mine is with her. So should I not be a part of them as a friend? Should I not hang around him, am I supporting adultery?
 
If two people are validly baptized Christians

They are free to marry

They are willing to “lovingly accept children” if God sends them.

They are freely choosing to get married

They are of sound mind

They promise to be faithful to their spouse

They can enter a valid marriage.

No one has to be romantically in love to validly marry.

Even if the “got married to escape a bad life”, that can be a perfectly valid marriage. We should encourage our friends to keep their marriage together, we should not encourage them to “be with” another person.
 
But that’s my point, the church can apparently annul that. I’ve even heard people in RCIA getting the process of that kind of marriage annulled. It’s still makes no sense. So that’s a sacramental yet the church can say it’s null? But doesn’t that go against Christ? This still seems odd to me. And if someone’s not baptized then divorce suddenly ok? Would If I’m baptized and then marry a non baptized, then we separated, I can get married again all because the other wasn’t baptized? I thought Paul said a woman is bound to her husband till he dies,
 
Last edited:
The Church does not “annul” anything.

Sometimes people ask the Church to examine their attempt at marriage. The Church looks at both people and the events/attitudes up to and including the wedding ceremony.

If the Church finds that something was lacking, for instance, the person did not freely consent or they had no intention to be faithful to their spouse. Should they find something like that, the Church declares that attempt at marriage to be null, nothing happened except a wedding. The wedding did not result in a marriage. The Church then issues a decree of nullity. She does not nullify a marriage, she says there never was a marriage.

Honestly, I do not know how the civil legal term “annulment” got tangled up in Catholic nullity decrees. All they have in common is one syllable.

Maybe the person was unable to consent because of their home life. That does not mean everyone with a bad childhood life is unable to enter a valid marriage.

ETA. Until a decree of nullity is issued, the person is to behave as if they are married. They don’t date, they don’t hook up. There are many times when the Church finds that the attempt at marriage is valid. The parties must understand that may be the case. They are not simply free to hook up because they are unhappy.
 
Last edited:
JesusReigns said:
So of someone for example gets married just to escape home life (because it’s extremely bad and they aren’t following God anyways) is that marriage sacramental? Let’s just say I have two friends in my life. One is a best friend who is a lapsed Catholic but I continue to be friends with him and am basically unctioning him back. However, my other is the one who got married just to escape the bad home life but basically she isn’t with him now. Their divorce isn’t final, and the best friend of mine is with her. So should I not be a part of them as a friend? Should I not hang around him, am I supporting adultery?
Click to expand...
You can still hang out with your friends, but if they attempted to get married and you had knowledge that it would be invalid, attending the wedding ceremony would imply you are supporting their decision. Instead you should not attend the wedding to make clear you do not support their decision. This can be said in a nice way, but some people may still be offended by it. If you don’t know the details of their past lives though, you don’t have enough information to tell if their previous marriage is invalid. In that case, you should assume everything is fine and going to the wedding is fine. In general, when you have incomplete information you should assume the best of others.
 
But wasn’t her reason for marriage invalid? (although from what I understand they did sorta try to make it work) also the woman in RCIA said she married someone because she was silly at some chapel and just did it. Like Vegas type chapel I think. How is hers not valid? They seem to be helping her out with the “null” pretty well too. Sorry I do mean to sound so nit picky, just want to completely understand what I’m getting into here, though I do believe the Catholic Church is His. Don’t want to transgress God by all means.
 
Last edited:
Paul said if theres a brother committing adultery, not be with him. However he’s not really a brother, he’s lapsed and I’m the one who has been there to witness to him and pray with him in moments he needed it. It’s just hard for me discern this matter. bare with me, I have some scrupulous tendencies.but I don’t wanna just blame it on scruples of course. I also have asked him to help me start recording music and edit it. (I’m starting a music career, trying to go out and spread the Word with my own music God gives me) so is it wrong to let him help? Again it may sound silly to you, but I am trying to be careful of the company I keep and what I support.
 
Last edited:
JesusReigns said:
Paul said if theres a brother committing adultery, not be with him. However he’s not really a brother, he’s lapsed and I’m the one who has been there to witness to him and pray with him in moments he needed it. It’s just hard for me discern this matter. bare with me, I have some scrupulous tendencies.but I don’t wanna just blame it on scruples of course. I also have asked him to help me start recording music and edit it. (I’m starting a music career, trying to go out and spread the Word with my own music God gives me) so is it wrong to let him help? Again it may sound silly to you, but I am trying to be careful of the company I keep and what I support.
Click to expand...
I believe Paul was writing to the leaders of a religious community. It would be very bad to have a leader who is committing adultery, just like how we can’t have priests committing adultery. They either have to stop the sin or leave the priesthood to get married. There is nothing wrong with walking with sinners and doing your best to guide them back to God. It’s totally fine to have him help you with projects.

You have to think about the reputation of the Church. Attending a wedding ceremony for an invalid marriage sends mixed messages to others. It makes us look like hypocrites. We say not to do something, but we don’t seem to care when people right in front of us are committing sin (like an invalid wedding). That’s very different than doing work with a sinner. At one job I had, some coworkers went clubbing every night, picking up women and such. I made it clear I wouldn’t participate in sin, but that didn’t mean I couldn’t work at that place anymore. By living my faith rather than being supportive of others’ sins, I maintained the Church’s good reputation.
 
Last edited:
JesusReigns said:
…
Click to expand...
The Catholic teaching is that a consummated true marriage between two baptized can only be dissolved by death. Now, to be a true marriage requires proper consent and no impediments. In scripture where it is said no divorce except it be for porneia which means illicit or unnatural relations such as incest or homosexuality, in other words, it was not valid from the start. Jesus Christ raised marriage between two baptized, to a sacrament.

It is not the government that is the moral authority but the Church (the power to bind an loose sin). The Church determines what the requirements are for the valid celebration of marriage and dispensable impediments. Some impediments are not dispensible.
 
i would agree on the Church Authority. I guess i always thought that even if someone divorces, there is no remarriage. And yes thats usually the case, but in certain cases its permissible to remarry?
 
Marriage, and even Christian marriage, is not complicated! But we are. We are comstantly trying to go against this Teaching because it is binding by the law, and we struggle to uphold law, even when Christ offers reconciliation when we sin against the law!!

Those who want to divorce, unless they are convicted of a lawful Christian reason (porneia) or have ligitimate reasons for legal separation, and think they are justified to enter a new relationship are not acting according to the Christian faith. They may have been hurt or disappointed, but Marriage is a Sacrament! It is a sign of the salvation of Jesus, Who never closes the door to reconciliation with Himself.

But as for your question. I usually try to ask questions that may both answer concerns and maybe convict. Your questions alone can be a form of admonishment, but qithout assuming to know or judge.
 
So if you get divorced because of porneia, then you can marry a new spouse? Your response was nice, thank you truly. But christ only said divorce is permissible in these cases, not another marriage. There still yours spouse form what i understand. Sorry if im misunderstanding what you said.
 
Let me start by sharing what the NAB Bible (what the Church uses for Mass) footnote to Matthew’s exception clause (porneia) states:

5:31–32 See Dt 24:1–5. The Old Testament commandment that a bill of divorce be given to the woman assumes the legitimacy of divorce itself. It is this that Jesus denies. (Unless the marriage is unlawful): this “exceptive clause,” as it is often called, occurs also in Mt 19:9, where the Greek is slightly different. There are other sayings of Jesus about divorce that prohibit it absolutely (see Mk 10:11–12; Lk 16:18; cf. 1 Cor 7:10, 11b), and most scholars agree that they represent the stand of Jesus. Matthew’s “exceptive clauses” are understood by some as a modification of the absolute prohibition. It seems, however, that the unlawfulness that Matthew gives as a reason why a marriage must be broken refers to a situation peculiar to his community: the violation of Mosaic law forbidding marriage between persons of certain blood and/or legal relationship (Lv 18:6–18). Marriages of that sort were regarded as incest (porneia), but some rabbis allowed Gentile converts to Judaism who had contracted such marriages to remain in them. Matthew’s “exceptive clause” is against such permissiveness for Gentile converts to Christianity; cf. the similar prohibition of porneia in Acts 15:20, 29. In this interpretation, the clause constitutes no exception to the absolute prohibition of divorce when the marriage is lawful.
 
Thank you so much for reply! Just read the catechism on this and its becoming clearer 🙂
 
JesusReigns said:
i would agree on the Church Authority. I guess i always thought that even if someone divorces, there is no remarriage. And yes thats usually the case, but in certain cases its permissible to remarry?
Click to expand...
If a Catholic married a non-Christian, with a dispensation from the Bishop, according to the canons, it would be a natural marriage, not a sacramental marriage. A natural marriage and an unconsummated sacramental marriage, can be dissolved. Such a person can then marry again.

“To the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him…But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case, the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace.” St. Paul to the Corinthians, 7: 12-15 (RSVCE)
  • The Pauline Privilege dissolves a real but natural marriage of two non-Christians in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism and the other wants to depart.
  • The Petrine Privilege dissolves a real but natural marriage of a Christian and a non-Christian, or non consummated marriage between two Christians, but is rarely approved.
  • An annulment is a declaration that there never was a valid marriage to begin with.
Here is the Catholic canon law for the Latin Church:
Can. 1141 A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death.

Can. 1142 For a just cause, the Roman Pontiff can dissolve a non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and a non-baptized party at the request of both parties or of one of them, even if the other party is unwilling.

Can. 1143 §1. A marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons is dissolved by means of the pauline privilege in favor of the faith of the party who has received baptism by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the same party, provided that the non-baptized party departs.

§2. The non-baptized party is considered to depart if he or she does not wish to cohabit with the baptized party or to cohabit peacefully without aVront to the Creator unless the baptized party, after baptism was received, has given the other a just cause for departing
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Actually, the bar for a valid marriage is not some super difficult thing. A valid marriage may be contracted for non-Catholics in marriage if both people meet the first three the below requirements, and the 4th req is for those who were baptized Catholic.

There is nothing that says “I really do not like living on my dad’s farm, so, I want to get married” means an invalid marriage.

Good explanation: http://www.foryourmarriage.org/catholic-marriage/faqs/

Just as individual states have certain requirements for civil marriage (e.g., a marriage license, blood tests), the Catholic Church also has requirements before Catholics can be considered validly married in the eyes of the Church. A valid Catholic marriage results from four elements: (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they freely exchange their consent; (3) in consenting to marry, they have the intention to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; and (4) their consent is given in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized Church minister. Exceptions to the last requirement must be approved by church authority.

Another way to look at it, many parishes have on-line resources that help folks in the process. When you see what the grounds for nullity are, it can help:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top