Warning about Ligamen (Prior Bond) annulments

[cortopar]

I have spent 3 years researching the Catholic Church, history, the fathers, theology, and because it pertains to my wife and I, annulments. I have read Catholic forums, Diocesan Tribunal web sites, canon lawyer commentaries.

All that is to say, I thought I clearly understood the Ligamen or Prior Bond annulment process. I was wrong.

The church does not “presume” that first marriages are valid. You have to PROVE they were. You basically fill the role of “defender of the bond” for your ex-spouses first marriage.

You not only need proof that a marriage took place, and proof of their subsequent civil divorce. But you also need to get a signed and notarized affidavit from your ex-spouse or their first spouse, or alternately from the mother/father of each that it was a first marriage for both of them, that neither one of them were Catholic at the time of their marriage, or that if either of them (but not both) were Catholic, that they did get an exemption from their bishop and/or later had their marriage convalidated.

If you cannot get that affidavit, or any of those conditions are not true, the marriage (their first) is automatically assumed invalid and your annulment must become a “Formal Case.”

Forget about not having to contact your ex-spouse and beg for their assistance. In all likelihood, you will.

I’m not saying this to vent anger, but only so that someone else doesn’t get their hopes up about a 3-6 week “administrative process” when they are, in fact, in for the full year or more annulment process.

Good luck and God bless,
Bob

 

[Kielbasi]

Apparently you’re talking about a situation where your first marriage was your ex’s second or subsequent marriage, and you’re seeking to annul that marriage so that your current marriage could be regularized.?

Doesn’t sound simple, sounds like the work for a canon lawyer.

 

[jmcrae]

I have spent 3 years researching the Catholic Church, history, the fathers, theology, and because it pertains to my wife and I, annulments. I have read Catholic forums, Diocesan Tribunal web sites, canon lawyer commentaries.

All that is to say, I thought I clearly understood the Ligamen or Prior Bond annulment process. I was wrong.

The church does not “presume” that first marriages are valid. You have to PROVE they were. You basically fill the role of “defender of the bond” for your ex-spouses first marriage.

You not only need proof that a marriage took place, and proof of their subsequent civil divorce. But you also need to get a signed and notarized affidavit from your ex-spouse or their first spouse, or alternately from the mother/father of each that it was a first marriage for both of them, that neither one of them were Catholic at the time of their marriage, or that if either of them (but not both) were Catholic, that they did get an exemption from their bishop and/or later had their marriage convalidated.

I’m completely confused, here.

If you are divorced and remarried, why are you trying to prove that your ex-spouse’s previous marriage (presumably when she was married to you) was valid?

Wouldn’t you be trying to find evidence that it *wasn’t? *

If you cannot get that affidavit, or any of those conditions are not true, the marriage (their first) is automatically assumed invalid and your annulment must become a “Formal Case.”

Isn’t that a good thing? This means that the investigation into the marriage (with the hope of finding it to have been invalid, so that you can marry the person whom you are currently calling your “wife”) can proceed, no?

Forget about not having to contact your ex-spouse and beg for their assistance. In all likelihood, you will.

Any contact is good contact - in fact, the worse names they call you, the better it is for your case.

I’m not saying this to vent anger, but only so that someone else doesn’t get their hopes up about a 3-6 week “administrative process” when they are, in fact, in for the full year or more annulment process.

No kidding. I know of no Catholic Marriage Tribunal that “guarantees” any time frame whatsoever.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

I’m not saying this to vent anger, but only so that someone else doesn’t get their hopes up about a 3-6 week “administrative process” when they are, in fact, in for the full year or more annulment process.

3-6 weeks? For an annulment? No.

Now, if you’re talking lack of form, that’s another matter. That’s where a Catholic gets hitched in a civil ceremony without receiving the proper dispensation.

But the other variety, particularly of two baptized people- nope. No way 3-6 weeks!

Too bad Cameron Lansing bowed out. He’s a good canon lawyer and could epxlain it better.

 

[cortopar]

“Formal Case” annulments take longer. A proper Ligamen case is as simple as a Lack of Form.

My ex-wife (my first marriage) was married before (our marriage was her second). I’m trying to prove that her first marriage was valid, hence her second (my first) is automatically invalid.

In this case, I will end up having to go through a formal case, because I cannot get the necessary affidavit.

I expect many people run into this (but no one talks about it online), because the Diocesan Marriage Tribunal said they process no more than 3 or 4 Ligamen cases per year. Now I know why.

 

[pnewton]

I sure can’t fault you for blowing off steam. I have been there and done that. My annulment took a year and a half and was one of the most stressful processes I have been through. Still, I count the effort beyond price.

 

[puzzleannie]

the moral of the story as we have stated hundreds of times here is that every marriage situation is unique and you cannot apply what happened to your friend, relative, neighbor, fellow forum member, or the couple you read about in the paper to your own situation. Each and every case must be presented in detail to your pastor and referred to the tribunal for a decision first on what procedure is necessary and then to carry out the necessary procedures.

Like any other legal matter, resolving these canon law marriage issues is not a DIY project, which is why the tribunal retains canon lawyers.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

the moral of the story as we have stated hundreds of times here is that every marriage situation is unique and you cannot apply what happened to your friend, relative, neighbor, fellow forum member, or the couple you read about in the paper to your own situation. Each and every case must be presented in detail to your pastor and referred to the tribunal for a decision first on what procedure is necessary and then to carry out the necessary procedures.

Like any other legal matter, resolving these canon law marriage issues is not a DIY project, which is why the tribunal retains canon lawyers.

Brava, particularly the DYI analogy. It’s not putting together a deck or evening out a concrete porch.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

“Formal Case” annulments take longer. A proper Ligamen case is as simple as a Lack of Form.

My ex-wife (my first marriage) was married before (our marriage was her second). I’m trying to prove that her first marriage was valid, hence her second (my first) is automatically invalid.

In this case, I will end up having to go through a formal case, because I cannot get the necessary affidavit.

I expect many people run into this (but no one talks about it online), because the Diocesan Marriage Tribunal said they process no more than 3 or 4 Ligamen cases per year. Now I know why.

And so…? What you’re telling people is nothing new.

 

[cameron_lansing]

Not actually bowed out but exercising discretion and selectivity.

I am sorry for Cortopar’s situation and will recall it in prayer. The advice not to rely on a simple resolution here is worth heeding.

From my point of view, proper ligamen cases are not as simple as “lack of form” cases.

The investigation of a ligamen is not an administrative process. Unlike the “lack of form case,” it is a true judicial process. It can often be done by a judicial process which admits definitive proofs by means of documents, and is called a documentary process. The determination in a lack of form case, while it uses documents, uses administrative power and not judicial power.

A ligamen of course only arises as a result of a valid marriage. Invalid marriages do not create a bond.

Those who assist parties in seeking a freedom to marry are responsible for putting some initial read of the facts before sending a case to the tribunal, and certainly, they are responsible for knowing the law. My advice as always, and consistently given by a number of reliable forum participants, is to contact the parish priest or the local tribunal.

As a documentary process, a ligamen can be transformed into a “formal” process for a number of reasons, and a tribunal is still required to have competence to try it, to cite the respondent, and have the intervention of the defender of the bond. While the defender is not obliged to appeal the sentence, he or she may, and so may the respondent. It would be negligent of any pastoral minister to dismiss the possible complications of any nullity process and to presume it will conclude favorably or “on time” for a wedding that has already been rashly scheduled.

We process considerably more than 3-4 ligamens annually at our tribunal, so this is one of the first checks. But for those advising anyone informally, it is important to recall that only a prior valid marriage forms an impediment. It is important for the rest of us to know and do our jobs so that we do not endanger the salvation of souls. This places a corresponding burden on all of us to exercise prudence if we do not have true expertise in an area that affects the lives of others.

Perhaps in the providence of God, this unfortunate situation will benefit others in the future, and we pray, the original poster.