Valid/invalid marriage questions

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

**Over the time I’ve been here at CAF I’ve seen many threads about marriages and decrees of nullity. What I am wondering is when/how/if an invalidy contracted marriage becomes valid without another ceremony (like a convalidation or something).

I am sorry if I am not using proper terms, I don’t know much about this stuff at all which is why I’m asking questions**
**
For example, if a husband and wife are not open to children at the time of their marriage, that could be grounds for a declaration of nullity. But at the point in their marriage where they change their minds and become open to life…is their marriage NOW valid?

What if there are other impediments? Like lack of free will/consent? Can that marriage just become valid over time as attitudes change?
**

 

[SarahR]

I really don’t know…but I would think there would have to be a priest or deacon acting on behalf of the church, to accept (?witness?..don’t know the proper term) their vows at that time.

But if they marry while in the state of mortal sin, my understanding is that the grace from the marriage can’t itself “kick in” until they are in the state of grace, because the soul isn’t otherwise capable of accepting the grace while in that state. But the grace would be available to them once they enter into the state of grace.

 

[BlestOne]

If attitudes change over time like openess to children, there would be no need of investigation of validity of the marriage, therefore, since we just assume validity until proven otherwise, there would be no need of any sort of change of status in that case. However, if the reason for invalidity had to do with lack of form (not married in the church, not free to contract marriage) then other action would be appropriate like a convalidation in the case of marriage not in the church or annulment of previous marriage to make the marriage valid in the eyes of the church.

 

[timotheos]

Great question, Feanaro’s Wife, I’ve had similar questions along this line myself. I, for one, wonder whether my marriage has ever been valid, in spite of being married in the Church 16 years ago. Quite simply, the priest who married us never asked me any questions at all, like do you believe in God? or do you intend to have children? or do you intend to raise your children as Catholics? etc. etc. If he had, he might have saved us a lot of difficulty, both past and present.

I’d bet there are not a small number of couples in this boat.

Tim

 

[Phemie]

Great question, Feanaro’s Wife, I’ve had similar questions along this line myself. I, for one, wonder whether my marriage has ever been valid, in spite of being married in the Church 16 years ago. Quite simply, the priest who married us never asked me any questions at all, like do you believe in God? or do you intend to have children? or do you intend to raise your children as Catholics? etc. etc. If he had, he might have saved us a lot of difficulty, both past and present.

I’d bet there are not a small number of couples in this boat.

Tim

You never answered any of those questions when you initially met with the priest or deacon you first saw to discuss your wedding? In the prenuptial investigation (here is one of the questionnaires for a diocese in the US) those questions are part of the interrogation which each party undergoes under oath and alone with the priest.

Although, AFAIK, the only time that the question of raising your children Catholic would normally arise would be if you were asking for permission for a mixed-marriage or dispensation for disparity of cult. Otherwise why would the priest not assume that two Catholics, marrying in the Church, would raise children Catholic?

 

[stbruno]

Here’s what I would say…come time for your anniversary, petition for a mass, and ask the celebrant to let you renew your vows. It’s a recommittment to the vows you took on your wedding day.And you don’t have to wait for a milestone anniversary. Take a morning off from work if the date lands on a weekday…and go to a daily mass with the nuptial blessing. We just had one 2 wks for a couple who were celebrating their 69th! Great witness to the rest of the parish too.
Scores points with your spouse too…very nice anniversary gift to one another as well, by reinviting God to take that very special place in your marriage.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Over the time I’ve been here at CAF I’ve seen many threads about marriages and decrees of nullity. What I am wondering is when/how/if an invalidy contracted marriage becomes valid without another ceremony (like a convalidation or something).
The canon law for this can be found here.

If at least one of the parties to the marriage is Catholic, then most of the time a convalidation ceremony is required. The only exception is if the invalidity of the marriage cannot be proven in the external forum. In this case a convalidation ceremony is not required.

If neither party to the marriage is Catholic, then they will clearly not have a (Catholic) convalidation ceremony. Therefore it is sufficient for the consent to continue once the impediment is removed, or for the defective consent to be repaired.

 

[tee_eff_em]

The canon law for this can be found here.

If at least one of the parties to the marriage is Catholic, then most of the time a convalidation ceremony is required. The only exception is if the invalidity of the marriage cannot be proven in the external forum. In this case a convalidation ceremony is not required.

If neither party to the marriage is Catholic, then they will clearly not have a (Catholic) convalidation ceremony. Therefore it is sufficient for the consent to continue once the impediment is removed, or for the defective consent to be repaired.

Exactly. This example comes from *The Invalid Marriage *by Lawrence G Wrenn (p 179):

John, a divorced man, and Jane, a single woman, marry. They are both Protestants. We would regard that marriage as invalid due to the impediment of ligamen or prior bond. After some years, however, John’s former wife dies and the impediment therefore ceases. According to c.1156 the marriage is then automatically convalidated.

tee
Not A Canon Lawyer

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

The canon law for this can be found here.

**Thanks for the link! But it is still confusing.

Let’s say a man and woman (both Catholic for this example) marry with the intent of divorcing if “things don’t work out” as so many people do in today’s society… would they need to officially “fix” the problem once they became aware that it may mean that their marriage was not contracted validly???

Or in the case of being open/not open to children… what if one of the spouses is very clear that they do not want kids. But then that spouse either changes their mind or God gives them some kids anyways…do they need to speak with a priest or are they now validly married?
**

 

[Just_Lurking]

Thanks for the link! But it is still confusing.

I think the rules are incredibly confusing.

**Let’s say a man and woman (both Catholic for this example) marry with the intent of divorcing if “things don’t work out” as so many people do in today’s society… would they need to officially “fix” the problem once they became aware that it may mean that their marriage was not contracted validly???

Or in the case of being open/not open to children… what if one of the spouses is very clear that they do not want kids. But then that spouse either changes their mind or God gives them some kids anyways…do they need to speak with a priest or are they now validly married?
**

Both of these cases are defective consent, as opposed to impediments to marriage. So the applicable rule is:

Can. 1159 §1. A marriage which is invalid because of a defect of consent is convalidated if the party who did not consent now consents, provided that the consent given by the other party perseveres.

§2. If the defect of consent cannot be proven, it is sufficient that the party who did not consent gives consent privately and in secret.

§3. If the defect of consent can be proven, the consent must be given in canonical form.

So, if the intention against permanence (your first case) or the intention against children (your second case) can be proven in the external forum, i.e. in front of a tribunal, then §3 applies and a convalidation ceremony is required. If the defective consent could not be proven in front of a tribunal, so that an annulment could not be obtained anyway, then §2 applies, and the private change of heart is sufficient to make the marriage valid.

 

[AHapka]

Just my personal opinion, but:

I would have to think that a marriage either occurs or doesn’t occur when it’s celebrated. And that an illicit one cannot become valid simply on the basis of changed opinions or attitudes over time.

Consider that there are rules (i.e. normally contracted before a bishop, priest, deacon, in the presence of witnesses, normally in a church, etc) regarding the form and matter of the Sacrament. That means that if one day the two “married” people are talking and decide to change their thinking regarding children or something else, are they then married at that time where there is no valid form (even though valid matter is now present)? I would say no as a Sacrament needs both to be valid.

Also, if a marriage could later become valid, then in the event a person in that marriage petitions for a declaration of nullity, the tribunal would need to examine not only the day of marriage, but each day the couple was married to determine if it became valid at one point. As they don’t now do that, I believe it lends support to my position.

But it is important to note that Canon law states that “Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.”

 

[Little_Katie]

I have a question in relation to this topic. My husband and I were married via the court system and still have yet to have a wedding ceremony through the Church. We’ve been waiting for a time where we can better afford it.

Before I got married I asked our priest if the marriage would be recognized by the Church if we just did a court wedding. He said yes it was recognized but to get it blessed later.

However I keep seeing it pop up in this forum that court weddings are invalid??

I’m confused!!

I really hate the idea that my marriage might not be considered valid!

 

[puzzleannie]

What if there are other impediments? Like lack of free will/consent? Can that marriage just become valid over time as attitudes change?

yes if the impediment is removed the marriage can become valid. that is not a blanket statement, just stating the possibility. for instance one or both parties enter the marriage opposed to having children even to the point of using contraception. They later undergo a change of heart, drop that practice and welcome children, so they are in a valid marriage. It depends on the nature of the impediment. don’t forget the underlying canon law principle, that the marriage is presumed valid until and unless proven otherwise. A marriage invalid on the face of it, lack of form for instance, must be convalidated since the facts are plain. If the reason for suspecting invalidity is in the internal forum, ie the person’s own disposition, that would not be uncovered outside a formal investigation, and that would not happen unless the marriage had broken down irretreivably. renewal of vows is a possibility for an anniversary remembrance, but by itself does not convalidate an invalid marriage.

 

[puzzleannie]

I have a question in relation to this topic. My husband and I were married via the court system and still have yet to have a wedding ceremony through the Church. We’ve been waiting for a time where we can better afford it.

Before I got married I asked our priest if the marriage would be recognized by the Church if we just did a court wedding. He said yes it was recognized but to get it blessed later.

However I keep seeing it pop up in this forum that court weddings are invalid??

I’m confused!!

I really hate the idea that my marriage might not be considered valid!

I suggest going back to the priest, giving him all the facts of your situation and having him explain what pertains to your personal situation. In general a marriage where either party is Catholic, carried out w/o regard to Church law on marriage for Catholics, is not valid. No the Church does not recognize a civil marriage for Catholics as valid. She does however take into account, when working with a couple to regularize the situation, their time together, children etc. “recognize” is not a precise word so can mean different things to different people. And it is not just a simple matter of civil marriage first, automatic convalidation when the couple pleases. There is a process that must be used, esp. to discern if the conditions for valid marriage exist. this is also off topic for this thread

 

[Little_Katie]

I suggest going back to the priest, giving him all the facts of your situation and having him explain what pertains to your personal situation. In general a marriage where either party is Catholic, carried out w/o regard to Church law on marriage for Catholics, is not valid. No the Church does not recognize a civil marriage for Catholics as valid. She does however take into account, when working with a couple to regularize the situation, their time together, children etc. “recognize” is not a precise word so can mean different things to different people. And it is not just a simple matter of civil marriage first, automatic convalidation when the couple pleases. There is a process that must be used, esp. to discern if the conditions for valid marriage exist. this is also off topic for this thread

Well, I guess what I a mostly concerned about is that because I haven’t had the marriage blessed in the church yet am I considered to be living in sin??

Sorry if I am off topic

 

[Cristiano]

I think that you are talking about a putative marriage. Is that correct?

 

[Little_Katie]

Uggg- so many big words! LOL

But yes… I think that sounds about right.

 

[Seatuck]

Well, I guess what I a mostly concerned about is that because I haven’t had the marriage blessed in the church yet am I considered to be living in sin??

Sorry if I am off topic

Yes. From the little information that you have shared here it does look as if you have an invalid marriage which is sinful. Catholics must follow the teachings of the church on marriage. I’d make an appointment with a different priest because the first one gave you incomplete advice at best.
It is not ok for Catholics to obtain a civil marriage and live as married people while waiting to have a marriage in the church. There are some reasons why the civil marriage takes place first as in countries where this is required but the couple is not to live together as man and wife in the meantime.

 

[adelore]

Well, I guess what I a mostly concerned about is that because I haven’t had the marriage blessed in the church yet am I considered to be living in sin??

Sorry if I am off topic

You are so right about being confused and please don’t feel alone, I’m in the boat of confusion with you.

For example, I was married outside of the Church. We then got divroced. (I had been away from the church for years before and after my marriage and divorce. I then got married again. Also out side of the church. Now years later I’m going back to the Catholic church.)

On one hand, the Catholic church doesn’t/didn’t recongize my first marriage because

1. I wasn’t married in the Church.
2. My husband wasn’t Catholic.
3. My second husband and I were not married in the Catholic Church either, (he’s never been married before) and now after 30 years away from the church I’m now attending the Catholic Church of my upbringing.

I’ve been told a couple of different things.

1. That since I didn’t marry in the Catholic Church the first time my marriage was Not valid.
2. I"ve been told I need to have my second marriage “blessed” by the church to be “really married in the Churchs eyes”.

On the other hand I’ve been told I need an anuliment from my first hubby to make my marriage to him “ended” by the church, which makes no sense to me at all if the Catholic Church didn’t reconigze my first marriage anyway.

Confused…without a doubt.

 

[Seatuck]

You are so right about being confused and please don’t feel alone, I’m in the boat of confusion with you.

For example, I was married outside of the Church. We then got divroced. (I had been away from the church for years before and after my marriage and divorce. I then got married again. Also out side of the church. Now years later I’m going back to the Catholic church.)

On one hand, the Catholic church doesn’t/didn’t recongize my first marriage because

1. I wasn’t married in the Church.
2. My husband wasn’t Catholic. This isn’t the exact reason. Catholics need permission to marry a non catholic. So not getting a dispensation is the reason.
3. My second husband and I were not married in the Catholic Church either, (he’s never been married before) and now after 30 years away from the church I’m now attending the Catholic Church of my upbringing. Awesome that you are now back Home!

I’ve been told a couple of different things.

1. That since I didn’t marry in the Catholic Church the first time my marriage was Not valid. This is true but the church still needs to see the evidence. You have to file a simple documentary or administrative case.
2. I"ve been told I need to have my second marriage “blessed” by the church to be “really married in the Churchs eyes”. Also true. All baptized Catholics are required to be married according to the beliefs and laws of the Catholic Church or there is no marriage. This both for your protection and the upholding of the Sacrament.

On the other hand I’ve been told I need an anuliment from my first hubby to make my marriage to him “ended” by the church, which makes no sense to me at all if the Catholic Church didn’t reconigze my first marriage anyway. See above. The church needs the proof that your attempted marriage was null. It won’t make you marriage “ended”. It will be declared to not have happened sacramentally. The church also needs proof of the civil agreement ( legal marriage and legal divorce), again for your protection.

Confused…without a doubt.

When you get a chance you might want to study up on the Sacramental nature of Marriage. Might help with the confusion.

I just want to really encourage Adelore and you others to keep faith and work to get these matters settled. It’s worth it in the end. You might learn something in the process and grow.