What does it mean to have an unrecognized marriage

[rick43235]

I’m sorry that these priests would do such a disservice as to flagerantly violate the laws of the Church and lead you to believe it is OK to raise your kids “both” Jewish and Catholic. How sad.

I, on the other hand, would be sorry if the OP decided to ignore her priest based on the opinion of some self-appointed expert on the internet. Now THAT would be sad.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

This includes some supportive Catholic Churches and Temples, as well as supportive Priests and Rabbis that work together with couples to guide them in living successfully in an interfaith marriage where both spouses are respected and supported to practice their own beliefs, and have also decided to raise their kids as both.

You must be in an unusual area to be able to get that. I know that when my brother married a Jewish woman they had a hard time finding a rabbi who would marry them. There’s a lot of concern on the Jewish side that if Jews marry Christians they are likely to lose the children and they don’t want that to happen.

 

[wanner47]

I, on the other hand, would be sorry if the OP decided to ignore her priest based on the opinion of some self-appointed expert on the internet. Now THAT would be sad.

It’s not merely an opinion of a “self-appointed expert” on the Internet. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church – see the previously cited sections of the Code of Canon Law. Unlike the OP, the poster in question has solid proof and evidence to back up her statements. It would *really *be sad of the OP ignored these facts and went against the teachings of the Church based on the snide comments of posters like yourself.

 

[rick43235]

It’s not merely an opinion of a “self-appointed expert” on the Internet. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church – see the previously cited sections of the Code of Canon Law. Unlike the OP, the poster in question has solid proof and evidence to back up her statements. It would *really *be sad of the OP ignored these facts and went against the teachings of the Church based on the snide comments of posters like yourself.

Yeah right - the teaching of the Catholic Church as interpreted by an anonymous poster on the internet - which contradicts what her priest is telleing her. Who would you have her listen to? Personally, I’d pick the priest.

 

[wanner47]

Yeah right - the teaching of the Catholic Church as interpreted by an anonymous poster on the internet - which contradicts what her priest is telleing her. Who would you have her listen to? Personally, I’d pick the priest.

I’d have her get several second opinions from different priests and canon lawyers, in addition to her priest and the posters of this forum. I wouldn’t have her unilaterally rely on or reject either person’s counsel.

However, if you look at the objective facts of the situation, it does seem like the “anonymous poster” is giving her more accurate information than her priest – a very sad situation indeed.

 

[dixieagle]

Yeah right - the teaching of the Catholic Church as interpreted by an anonymous poster on the internet - which contradicts what her priest is telleing her. Who would you have her listen to? Personally, I’d pick the priest.

Rick,

When an “anonymous poster” cites the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, they are presenting the actual, definitive teaching of the Church, not subjective opinion.

It has become apparent that the OP has been upset to hear what the Church (not posters’ opinions, but the Church) actually teaches. She asked about “unrecognized marriages” and her obligations as a Catholic and a number of posters have told her, correctly.

Priests who look the other way in matters like these do no one a service, no matter how warm and fuzzy the interfaith community the OP has found is. When one professes to be Catholic, there are obligations, and they are sometimes difficult to live up to. But there’s no getting around some things, difficult or not.

 

[rick43235]

Rick,

When an “anonymous poster” cites the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, they are presenting the actual, definitive teaching of the Church, not subjective opinion.

It has become apparent that the OP has been upset to hear what the Church (not posters’ opinions, but the Church) actually teaches. She asked about “unrecognized marriages” and her obligations as a Catholic and a number of posters have told her, correctly.

Priests who look the other way in matters like these do no one a service, no matter how warm and fuzzy the interfaith community the OP has found is. When one professes to be Catholic, there are obligations, and they are sometimes difficult to live up to. But there’s no getting around some things, difficult or not.

 

[rick43235]

Rick,

When an “anonymous poster” cites the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, they are presenting the actual, definitive teaching of the Church, not subjective opinion.

It has become apparent that the OP has been upset to hear what the Church (not posters’ opinions, but the Church) actually teaches. She asked about “unrecognized marriages” and her obligations as a Catholic and a number of posters have told her, correctly.

Priests who look the other way in matters like these do no one a service, no matter how warm and fuzzy the interfaith community the OP has found is. When one professes to be Catholic, there are obligations, and they are sometimes difficult to live up to. But there’s no getting around some things, difficult or not.

dixieagle,

Thank you for your thoughts. Before I respond, let me say that this topic is one that is currently affecting me personally, and I recognize that I sometimes get “testy” when posting on this subject. Honestly, I mean no disrespect.

I guess what I, possibly the OP, and probably many others find so frustrating is the seemingly arbitrary way the Code of Canon Law is applied, and the many different interpretations there are of the Law - especially when it comes to the subject of divorce and marriage. In the case of the OP, she has found someone with whom she wants to spend the rest of her life. She recognizes that, due to their different religious backgrounds, there will be some issues that have to be resolved. She also recognizes that, while she has a need to follow the teachings of the Church, she also has to honor the traditions of her husband-to-be, who is a member of a religion that actually predates the Catholic Church. Happily, she has found a situation where…

***"…there is a pretty strong community of support for Catholic-Jewish marriages and families. This includes some supportive Catholic Churches and Temples, as well as supportive Priests and Rabbis that work together with couples to guide them in living successfully in an interfaith marriage where both spouses are respected and supported to practice their own beliefs, and have also decided to raise their kids as both." ***

When she expressed her joy at finding this situation, she was beset upon by members of this forum who, applying their own view of Canon Law, proceeded to tell her how wrong and sinful she was. Even you are referring to her advisors as “priests who look the other way.” Respectfully, who are you to say that her priests are incorrect? Perhaps they are honestly applying Canon Law the way they see it. At the very least, I think we have to admit that these priests have more knowledge of Canon Law than you or I.

The cousin of a friend of mine happens to be a nun. Recently I was having dinner with them and the subject of Catholic annulment in general, and my marriage situation in particular, came up for discussion. I was prepared to endure a lecture similar to what one often gets on this forum. Instead, she responded by observing that the Church expends much more energy keeping people out than encouraging people to come in. Sadly, the Church’s rules regarding marriage and divorce are a big part of that.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Rick,

When an “anonymous poster” cites the Code of Canon Law and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, they are presenting the actual, definitive teaching of the Church, not subjective opinion.

It has become apparent that the OP has been upset to hear what the Church (not posters’ opinions, but the Church) actually teaches. She asked about “unrecognized marriages” and her obligations as a Catholic and a number of posters have told her, correctly.

Priests who look the other way in matters like these do no one a service, no matter how warm and fuzzy the interfaith community the OP has found is. When one professes to be Catholic, there are obligations, and they are sometimes difficult to live up to. But there’s no getting around some things, difficult or not.

How or what Canon is applied to a specific situation depends on the details of that specific situation. In this case on the internet we do not have the details necessary to specifically apply any Canon Law to the OP’s situation. We can only take guesses as to what might apply and how in a general sense.

 

[dixieagle]

How or what Canon is applied to a specific situation depends on the details of that specific situation. In this case on the internet we do not have the details necessary to specifically apply any Canon Law to the OP’s situation. We can only take guesses as to what might apply and how in a general sense.

Certainly true!

 

[wanner47]

How or what Canon is applied to a specific situation depends on the details of that specific situation. In this case on the internet we do not have the details necessary to specifically apply any Canon Law to the OP’s situation. We can only take guesses as to what might apply and how in a general sense.

Very true! That’s why I think the OP should consult a canon lawyer as well as another priest for a second opinion about her situation.

The cousin of a friend of mine happens to be a nun. Recently I was having dinner with them and the subject of Catholic annulment in general, and my marriage situation in particular, came up for discussion. I was prepared to endure a lecture similar to what one often gets on this forum. Instead, she responded by observing that the Church expends much more energy keeping people out than encouraging people to come in. Sadly, the Church’s rules regarding marriage and divorce are a big part of that.

Jesus himself said that his teachings would be difficult to follow, would cause division between families, etc. I think the Church requires quality above quantity. Personally, I’d rather have 50 Catholics who actually follow Christ’s teachings in the Church than 500 who don’t.

If the Church made its marriage laws “easier,” She would be going against the teachings of Christ, who was QUITE clear when he said that divorce (and remarriage after divorce) was *not *acceptable unless the marriage was unlawful in the first place. Too many Christian churches have already ignored this directive. I’m glad the Church is still holding fast to the teachings of Christ, which only continues to prove that She is is the pillar and bulwark of Truth.

 

[Chris_Robinson]

*If the Church made its marriage laws “easier,” She would be going against the teachings of Christ, who was QUITE clear when he said that divorce (and remarriage after divorce) was *not acceptable unless the marriage was unlawful in the first place. Too many Christian churches have already ignored this directive. I’m glad the Church is still holding fast to the teachings of Christ, which only continues to prove that She is is the pillar and bulwark of Truth.

“unless the marriage was unlawful in the first place”

“unlawful”

Does anyone know how often someone goes through the annulment process and the Church does not find the marriage unlawful? I would be willing to guess that over the years this process has become easier and easier to grant annulment. Have they have found more and more things to deem unlawful in order to grant annulment? I would think that the things they are deeming “unlawful” are present in a huge percentage of current Catholic marriages. I kinda associate the term “annulment” with “it never happened” which is obviously not true. What about if a catholic couple marries, has kids, then gets divorced with annulment? Are those kids then considered “bastards” or “out of wedlock” children? How does the church feel about catholic children being born out of wedlock because the marriage was “not lawful” all along? I know I might sound like my points/questions are ridiculous but it kinda seems par for the course and I really want logical answers. Thanks.

 

[Chris_Robinson]

If the Church made its marriage laws “easier,” She would be going against the teachings of Christ, who was QUITE clear when he said that divorce (and remarriage after divorce) was *not *acceptable unless the marriage was unlawful in the first place. Too many Christian churches have already ignored this directive. I’m glad the Church is still holding fast to the teachings of Christ, which only continues to prove that She is is the pillar and bulwark of Truth.

“unless the marriage was unlawful in the first place”

“unlawful”

What is unlawful?
Does anyone know how often someone goes through the annulment process and the Church does not find the marriage unlawful? I would be willing to guess that over the years this process has become easier and easier to grant annulment. Have they have found more and more things to deem unlawful in order to grant annulment? I would think that the things they are deeming “unlawful” are present in a huge percentage of current Catholic marriages. I kinda associate the term “annulment” with “it never happened” which is obviously not true. What about if a catholic couple marries, has kids, then gets divorced with annulment? Are those kids then considered “bastards” or “out of wedlock” children? How does the church feel about catholic children being born out of wedlock because the marriage was “not lawful” all along? I know I might sound like my points/questions are ridiculous but it kinda seems par for the course and I really want logical answers. Thanks.

 

[wanner47]

If the Church made its marriage laws “easier,” She would be going against the teachings of Christ

From this article:

Annulment statistics for 2002

(the most recent year figures are available)

– Annulment hearings, worldwide: 56,246

– Annulments granted, worldwide: 46,092

Annulments by continent:

-Africa: 343

-Oceania: 676

-Asia: 1,562

-Europe: 8,855

-North America: 30,968

-South and Central America: 5,688

]I would be willing to guess that over the years this process has become easier and easier to grant annulment.

I think it’s more that, over the years, more and more couples engage in unlawful marriages due to lowering societal standards and morals, and as a result more and more couples are seeking annulments (thus, more and more are granted). Also, many couples, after an initial consultation with a priest or tribunal official, will decide not to go forward with the annulment process if their priest or the official recommends against it. Therefore, the couples who do petition the tribunal already have a “strong case,” so to speak, if they haven’t been discouraged from petitioning.

Have they have found more and more things to deem unlawful in order to grant annulment?

I think it’s more that society has found more and more ways to make marriages unlawful. Contraception, for example. In 1920, it was all but impossible for a couple to enter marriage with one or both parties intending to contracept. Today, however, that’s not the case.

I would think that the things they are deeming “unlawful” are present in a huge percentage of current Catholic marriages. I kinda associate the term “annulment” with “it never happened” which is obviously not true.

Actually, it is. A decree of nullity states that a **valid **marriage never existed – but it does not say that a relationship never existed, or that the parties didn’t believe themselves to be in a valid marriage.

An What about if a catholic couple marries, has kids, then gets divorced with annulment? Are those kids then considered “bastards” or “out of wedlock” children? How does the church feel about catholic children being born out of wedlock because the marriage was “not lawful” all along?

From the article previously cited:

An annulment does not change the civil nature of the marriage. The legitimacy of children, as well as rights to property, debts and other civil matters are unchanged by a degree of nullity.

 

[Seatuck]

Unfortunately in this country we have seen poor catechesis and poor transmission of the faith by parents for at least 50 years now. On a variety of topics including marriage. This is making it seem like the church is too lenient with “annulments”. Of course any time we here that a priest is telling a couple to put off marriage or disuade them from it we have a huge outcry that it isn’t his right to do it. So we are getting what we have sewn.

I do think that the stigma of getting seeking a decision by the tribunal has been reduced. More people understand that their children won’t be illigitimate and so forth.

 

[Inman]

I would like ask the OP a question that I think may help clarify what she intends.

Assuming your finance is granted an annulment, and you are blessed with a child, if your child asks you:

“Daddy says that Jesus is not God, but you say that he is God, what is the truth?”

What do you tell the child in that situation?

 

[1ke]

I would like ask the OP a question that I think may help clarify what she intends.

Assuming your finance is granted an annulment, and you are blessed with a child, if your child asks you:

“Daddy says that Jesus is not God, but you say that he is God, what is the truth?”

What do you tell the child in that situation?

Yes, this is the question I posted to the OP when she said she intends to raise her child as “both” Jewish and Catholic.

Jesus is either God or he isn’t. Which is it?