Valid Marriage Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter msugeotech
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

msugeotech

Guest
I was married for only 2 months (in the Episcopal church) in 1996 and divorced later that same year. Neither one of us were Catholic. Fast forward to 1999, I married my current wife (who was Baptist) in the Baptist Church and we are still married today (again, neither of us were Catholic). In 2006, we decided to join the Catholic church, and was told I would have to have a Declaration of Nullity from my previous marriage - which I have done.

Now, doesn’t the presumption of validity automatically fall to my current marriage? I’m asking because my priest said we would have to convalidate our marriage. If validity now falls on my current marriage, how do you justify convalidation of a valid marriage? Am I missing something here?

Thanks for the help!!
 
Even though your first marriage was found to be invalid, it was still presumed valid at the time you remarried. That means that second marriage couldn’t be valid since you weren’t free to marry.
 
Thanks for the reply. I guess this leads me to my next question. Is there any reason we could not validate our marriage by radical sanation as opposed to a simple convalidation?
 
msugeotech said:
Thanks for the reply. I guess this leads me to my next question. Is there any reason we could not validate our marriage by radical sanation as opposed to a simple convalidation?
Click to expand...
What issues do you have with convalidation? It is retroactive to your wedding day.

~Liza
 
I really don’t know a whole lot about this matter, just from what I have read here…but if both parties were NOT Catholic when they were married…would that affect them as they prepare to enter the Church?:confused:

:heart:Blyss
 
lizaanne said:
What issues do you have with convalidation? It is retroactive to your wedding day.

~Liza
Click to expand...
No it’s not. A radical sanation is, since it means ‘healing at the root’ but a convalidation means that the Church only recognizes your marriage as of the date of the convalidation.
 
I thought with a convalidation the Church recognizes your marriage on the day you convalidate it. With the radical sanation, you petition the Bishop to recognize your entire marriage, which has been sometimes called a “retroactive convalidation”.
 
msugeotech said:
I thought with a convalidation the Church recognizes your marriage on the day you convalidate it. With the radical sanation, you petition the Bishop to recognize your entire marriage, which has been sometimes called a “retroactive convalidation”.
Click to expand...
Ahh - then I stand corrected. That is very very interesting to know, thinking of my own past situation. Hmmmm…

Thanks for correcting me! I learned something! 🙂

I can now see why he would prefer radical sanation now.

~Liza
 
So I am still bound to Canon Law even if none of us were Catholic at the time? Techincally we are not Catholic now, or yet I should say.
 
msugeotech said:
Thanks for the reply. I guess this leads me to my next question. Is there any reason we could not validate our marriage by radical sanation as opposed to a simple convalidation?
Click to expand...
I’m no Canon lawyer but it would seem to me that a radical sanation would say that your marriage was valid from the get-go but it can’t be because you weren’t free to marry.
 
msugeotech said:
So I am still bound to Canon Law even if none of us were Catholic at the time? Techincally we are not Catholic now, or yet I should say.
Click to expand...
Ahh!! This changes things a bit (I believe) - when you and your wife are received into the Catholic Church your marriage is automatically validated.

Ok - correct me again if I’m wrong - but I think I got this one right. 😉

~Liza
 
lizaanne said:
Ahh!! This changes things a bit (I believe) - when you and your wife are received into the Catholic Church your marriage is automatically validated.

Ok - correct me again if I’m wrong - but I think I got this one right. 😉

~Liza
Click to expand...
No, it isn’t. In this case the Church’s position is that he wasn’t free to marry the second time. He’s free to marry NOW that he has a decree of nullity but he wasn’t free to marry until he got that. That’s why I suspect that he can’t have a radical sanation but must have a convalidation.
 
Phemie said:
No, it isn’t. In this case the Church’s position is that he wasn’t free to marry the second time. He’s free to marry NOW that he has a decree of nullity but he wasn’t free to marry until he got that. That’s why I suspect that he can’t have a radical sanation but must have a convalidation.
Click to expand...
Oh yes - I totally agree with that. What I meant was that it would be automatically convalidated. Though I believe the priest needs to do something extra at the time they are confirmed into the Church, but that the marriage comes along with them into the Church. But NOT retroactively - that makes sense given your comments.

~Liza
 
msugeotech said:
Now, doesn’t the presumption of validity automatically fall to my current marriage? I’m asking because my priest said we would have to convalidate our marriage. If validity now falls on my current marriage, how do you justify convalidation of a valid marriage? Am I missing something here?

Thanks for the help!!
Click to expand...
Your priest is confused.

Your first marriage was declared null. Your current marriage is presumed valid, unless there is some issue with consent. You were not Catholic, therefore canonical form is not relevant.

I suggest you bring it up with your priest and ask him to provide the grounds on which he believes you require convalidation and to support that with canon law.
 
Can. 1163 §1. A marriage which is invalid because of an impediment or a defect of legitimate form can be sanated provided that the consent of each party perseveres.

§2. A marriage which is invalid because of an impediment of natural law or of divine positive law can be sanated only after the impediment has ceased.
 
msugeotech said:
Thanks for the reply. I guess this leads me to my next question. Is there any reason we could not validate our marriage by radical sanation as opposed to a simple convalidation?
Click to expand...
It is complicated. Some circumstances require a new exchange of consent (vows). When this is required it is in fact a new Marriage and is not retroactive. This would seem to be the case.
 
msugeotech said:
So I am still bound to Canon Law even if none of us were Catholic at the time? Techincally we are not Catholic now, or yet I should say.
Click to expand...
The inability to enter into a second Marriage after a civil divorce is not Catholic Law, but is Divine Law, and technically applies to all, Catholic or not.
 
lizaanne said:
Ahh!! This changes things a bit (I believe) - when you and your wife are received into the Catholic Church your marriage is automatically validated.

Ok - correct me again if I’m wrong - but I think I got this one right. 😉

~Liza
Click to expand...
When currently in a valid Marriage, entry into union with the Catholic Church does not effect anything. The only special circumstance is when one person is a Baptized Christian and the other is not Baptized (or both are not Baptized), and they are in a valid Marriage. When the non-Baptized person(s) is Baptized upon entering the Catholic Church the Marriage becomes a Sacrament, nothing additional needs to be done.

When two Christians validly Married in a Protestant Community, without any Divine impediments, their Marriage is accepted as valid and Sacramental by the Catholic Church upon entry into the Catholic Church.
 
What defines “entry” into the Catholic church? Confirmation?
 
msugeotech said:
What defines “entry” into the Catholic church? Confirmation?
Click to expand...
For an already baptized person it would entail making a profession of faith and being confirmed.

For an unbaptized person, it would be Baptism followed by Confirmation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top