Valid Marriage

[Grtonia]

Hello,

I was listening to Catholic Answers the other day and got disturbed. Please help me clear this up.

When I was 19 yrs old I was married in the Methodist church. After 11 years my then wife divorced me to be with another man. Three years after that divorce, I met a wonderful Catholic lady who was divorced. At the time I was just a “Christian.” We met with her priest and explained our desire to be married and for me to become a Catholic. He said that we could get married civilly and that he would begin the annulment process. After a couple of classes, during Mass one Sunday the priest confirmed me as a Catholic. (I had been baptized as a child in the Methodist church.) He kept avoiding the annulment issue. After 18 months, we sought out a different priest in a different diocese. I started this process and explained my previous marriage to him as well as my abbreviated course into the Catholic Church. He assured me that I was Catholic even though the procedure might have been unorthodox. He also said that there was no need for me to do anything about my previous marriage as it was outside the Catholic Church. He then met with my wife and started the annulment process. After duly investigating her previous marriage, the Tribunal informed her that the marriage was never valid and she was free to marry within the Catholic Church. We were married by the same priest within a few weeks. If I understood the conversation properly, I may not be validly married. Please help me. Am I sinning by being married? What should I do?

THANX!

 

[arnulf]

This is a complex question, and I urge you to submit it to the “Ask an Apologist” forum where it can be addressed by someone with expertise in this area.

In the meantime, be assured that have not sinned by getting married in the Catholic Church !

 

[Ham1]

You are Catholic.

However, the Church does consider marriages between non-catholics to be valid. Therefore, you most likely need to have your first marriage annulled. Was your first wife Catholic or baptized? I would contact your diocese and find out what to do.

The priest obviously should not have told you that it was no problem. Also, the priest should not have witnessed the marriage without having the first marriage annulled.

You are not sinning by being married because you did not know.

 

[stbruno]

More than likely an annulment is necessary to get everyone in compliance. Check into your diocesan family ministries office, to see if you can get a reading on where you stand, if you haven’t gotten a sufficient answer via your pastor. It’s worth the effort! God bless you!

 

[Grtonia]

Thanx for the great advise and blessings. I will seek out Diocesan guidance to correct this. God Bless you all for your help and understanding.

 

[PKK]

In the Diocese of Ft. Worth all previous Marriages must be annulled. I believe this should be the same everywhere. Even people who are married by the Justice of the Peace must get an annulment, although this is a little bit of a different course of action. Rather than going to a particular priest, I would call the Diocesan Tribunal Office. If you need the number you can call you local church ask them for the number to the Diocese, and then ask the Diocese for the Tribunal Office. They are the best place to go to give you the answers you need since this is what they deal with in your area. They may even have a webpage our does. I do not believe that you have sinned in doing what you thought was right, but it needs to be checked into and corrected if need be. Just wondering if you attend St. Anne in Oswego? I have a twin sister that goes there Pat Constantine. Churches are large so you may not know her if you do.

 

[1stFreedom]

I met a wonderful Catholic lady who was divorced. At the time I was just a “Christian.” We met with her priest and explained our desire to be married and for me to become a Catholic. He said that we could get married civilly and that he would begin the annulment process.

This is tragic. Anullment is not a divorce, yet it is handled by parish Priests in such a fashion.

Giving permission for you two to civilly marry when her marriage was still viewed as valid by the Church (and it was) is sinful and scandelous.

Priests often give civil divorce a power it doesn’t have. Civil divorce doesn’t give anybody permission to date, desire, or whatever another person.

Read this from the Council of Trent (an Eccumenical council whose moral teachings are infallible):

"The Commandment which forbids us to covet the goods of our neighbour, is followed by another, which forbids us to covet our neighbour’s wife a law that prohibits not only the adulterer’s criminal desire of his neighbour’s wife, but even the wish to marry her. "

Understand that Marriage, regardless of the views of those seeking anullments, is presumed to be valid until proven otherwise by a tribunal. Yet the attitude by priests seems to be it’s invalid till proven otherwise. Who knows how many people are being mislead by their Priests.

The priest should have told you both to end the relationship, period. Friendship was not a possiblity due to the intense desire you had for each other (a sinful situation).

She was a married woman in the eyes of the church and your mere desire for her was scandelous. (As far as I know, a civil marriage has no meaning in the eyes of the Church and having sexual relations is fornication, and in your case, adultery also.)

It sounds like this priest sold you on the “mercy of man” instead of telling you about the TRUE mercy of God and how He would see you both through the split in the relationship.

This is all part of the anullment scandal that is in desparate need of reform. Unfortunately, you two were mislead.

Since the anullment was granted (odds are on questionable grounds) things are fine in terms of your wife.

As far as you are concerned, I’m not sure if you need an anullment.

 

[Grtonia]

This is all part of the anullment scandal that is in desparate need of reform. Unfortunately, you two were mislead.

Since the anullment was granted (odds are on questionable grounds) things are fine in terms of your wife.

As far as you are concerned, I’m not sure if you need an anullment.

Wow, Ist Freedom. I was seeking opinions and advice, but in your case I think got more. It appears that you had an anti annullment agenda when you offered your advice. In fact you sounded rather mad about the whole idea.

In particular how can you pass judgement on the grounds that the Tribunal used to grant my wife’s anullment?

I love you because you are one of God’s creatures, but may I suggest you refrain from giving consel when the subject has you so emotionally charged.

God Bless you,
Grtonia

 

[1stFreedom]

Wow, Ist Freedom. I was seeking opinions and advice, but in your case I think got more. It appears that you had an anti annullment agenda when you offered your advice. In fact you sounded rather mad about the whole idea.

There is nothing wrong with an anullment whatsoever. The whole idea of anullment is a credit to the Church.

In particular how can you pass judgement on the grounds that the Tribunal used to grant my wife’s anullment?

Well, I said “odds are” – not an absolute judgement, but a cynical judgement. If you search canon law, there are very few grounds for anullment.

The most abused grounds for anullments are: emotional immaturity, defective consent, and minor psychological conditions.

Here is an example of what constitutes a lack of judgement (“defective consent”):

**Canon Law 1095, 2: **
The following are incapable of contracting marriage:
those who sufer from a grave defect of discretion of judgment concerning the essential matrimonial rights and duties mutually to be handed over and accepted;​

Notice the keyword GRAVE. Many dioceses have dropped this word from their websites dealing with anullments. Many books on the subject have also avoided this essential word. Probably everbody who got married had some minor defect of judgement!

Many anullments are handed down for reasons which were not grave in nature. To add insult to injury to the local tribunals, over 90% of “defective consent” anullments which are granted and appealed to the Roman Rota are overturned! There is an obvious disconnect between what Church Law states and what the Tribunals follow!

The Tribunals in the US, for the most part, feel it is their job to give people a second chance at happiness regardless of what canon law says. They feel it is their job to come up with a reason why a failed marriage is invalid.

For example, the questionaires given out ask many questions about the relationship itself AFTER the marriage ceremony. Many anullments have been granted on the basis that since the marriage failed, it must have been invalid in the first place. By judging the problems the marriage had after the vows, they achronistically create a reason why the consent was defective!

Recently, the Holy Father told the Roman Rota that a failed marriage, or a marriage that didn’t live up to an ideal marriage, is not a reason to grant an anullment!

Remember, the anullment deals ONLY with what happened during the time of consent (the wedding), not after. The success or failure of a marriage does not determine it’s validity. To say otherwise is to simply ignore Canon law on the subject – something the tribunals seem fond of doing.

If you want to know the solid grounds are, visit this Vatican website:

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Z.HTM

I love you because you are one of God’s creatures, but may I suggest you refrain from giving consel when the subject has you so emotionally charged.

The counsel I give is based on fact, not emotions. It’s all in Canon law.

The saddest thing is that people trust their priest and their Church to tell them the truth about anullment. Yet, most of the time they are unknowingly mislead. Then they get angry when they run into a thread like mine, but please, don’t shoot the messenger.

Now, the grounds in your case may in fact be solid. Without knowing the grounds and the facts, and going by the track record of the Tribunals, there’s a good chance that I may not be off base!

The anullment scandal is one of the great scandals in the history of the Church.

If you’d really like to read more on this subject, read this book:

**What God Has Joined Together: The Annulment Crisis in American Catholicism
**by Robert H. Vasoli

I belive that anullment reform is long overdue. There is nothing actually wrong with canon law, and in theory, nothing needs to change. But since the tribunals are not following the code, the code itself needs tightened down. There needs to be a section dealing with INVALID reasons to grant anullments, conditions which are not grave in nature, etc…