P
Phemie
Guest
Problems which most of the time are of their own making, sometime inadvertantly but often because they didn’t care about “Church rules” and went and did whatever the heck they wanted.
- Status
D
dans0622
Guest
I wonder if the canon lawyers would see any of that pile of money. It would be nice.
A
Abba
Guest
Your question motivated me to do a little research and learn a little. I found your question a little loaded as I have the impression that most canon lawyers are priests. I would think that priests would be interested in money only to help the Church and others. Certainly, to imply otherwise would be improper.
It turns out that four out of five canon lawyers are priests in the United States. The others are religious and laity but all are hired by and paid by the bishop. It’s a salary job.
I read the articled linked to below at canonlaw.info it’s a great website with a lot of info.
canonlaw.info/a_canonlawyersarearent.htm
I tried to get some figures for the salaries but did not find any.
Is an annulment that much more than a secular divorce? How much is that pile of money? I don’t think that the Church is charging to make a profit out of the situation, do you?
P
Phemie
Guest
An annulment in our diocese costs $500, half payable when the petition is first accepted and the last payment after the process is over. In the Archdiocese it’s $750.
I think the salary would depend greatly on the diocese/archdiocese.
D
dans0622
Guest
Hello,
It wasn’t a question but a (somewhat sarcastic and self-serving) comment in response to what I found to be a remark–by “Johndoe100”–that is open to misunderstanding, if not worse. You are correct, of course: there are no big profits in the Church.
As far as a canon lawyer’s salary: it depends on the person’s status (priest, religious, single, married, w/children) as well as experience and location.
What does a declaration of nullity cost? Nothing, where I work. That’s unusual, however. What does the typical divorce cost? I don’t know.
Dan
A
Abba
Guest
Thank you for the clarification, Dan.
A
Abba
Guest
Thank you Phemie for providing this info. Well, $500 for such an involved time and energy consuming process is very good. They are barely breaking even if that.
P
Phemie
Guest
It’s certainly much cheaper than a contested divorce.
As Dan said, the salaries at the diocese depend on who is being paid. A secular priest is paid a salary, a religious person is given a stipend (usually negotiated by the Order or Congregation), a lay person’s salary would vary.
It is the same with the money paid to a religious or secular parish priest. In our diocese we had many religious priests. Their stipend was negotiated by their Congregation and all were paid the same amount and the diocese provided the parish with a car for their use. Having a secular priest is much more expensive for a parish, because he has more expenses. He has to have a car so he gets a car allowance, we pay health insurance for him, Canada Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, etc. In effect, we pay a secular priest about about twice as much as a religious one.
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
This question needs to be answered by someone who works in the field and is familiar with Canon law, not on an internet forum. The fact that the person did not meet the civil requirements and then deceived the priest by lying may affect whether the marriage is valid, because we in the Church are not above the law of the land, and ordinarily need to meet the civil requirements. This is an unusual situation. I disagree that one can say right off, with what facts are given, that the marriage is sacramental and valid. It should go before the tribunal to determine it’s validity.
P
Phemie
Guest
It meets the requirements for a putative marriage (celebrated in the Church and one person believed it was valid) so unless the couple is splitting up I don’t see that anything needs to be done.
A
Abba
Guest
No government paperwork is filed even when it is a non-convalidation. Isn’t it the case that the reason the Church marriage is also a civil marriage is because the legal marriage is required in order for the Church marriage to take place?
My understanding is that it uses to be the case up to decades (1950s, 1960s) ago that the Church marriage also served as the legal marriage. However, I think the Catholic Church now requires the world over that the couple marry legally first in order for the Catholic marriage ceremony to take place. This is the reason, for instance, that after a convalidation, no further government paperwork needs to be filed nor is it filed after a regular Catholic wedding because as far as the government is concerned and for all its purposes the couple are married anyway since they are married legally. It’s just the same as when a couple marries legally at 10:30 am and by the Catholic Church at 3:00 (as I was) - there is no reason to go back to the town hall.
Although the Catholic Church may not recognize a divorce this does not affect the government recognition of the couple as divorced.
Is a Catholic marriage still recognized as a legal marriage in the United States all on it’s own without a legal marriage? I was told by someone who works for the government that they recognize ceremonies as marriage… or if the couple has been living consecutively for more than seven years. :whacky:
The legal documents are required and the marriage ceremony is performed with the assumption that this requirement has been met. If a priest would be marry people without that requirement being met, then I would not wonder so much about the validity of the marriage I mentioned on the OP, it would be obvious and one would not give the matter of a legal marriage missing that much importance, but, again, I think the Catholic Church is now requires a legal marriage all over the world or at least where this requirement exists it expects it to be provided in order to offer the Sacrament.
Also, I do not know where the lying and deception part really falls in to receive the Sacrament. Although, honesty and respect for the Church and honestly to the partners is not a requirement of the Sacrament. I guess, I can see how it could fall under sins that need to be confessed and do not necessarily make the marriage invalid. But, that missing legal marriage, I am not so convinced about, as the Church requires it previous to the Church marriage.
What is a convalidation by radical sanation?
A
Abba
Guest
How is it sufficient that at least one person ‘believed’ it was valid?
Never mind, I am researching it…thanks. I’m starting with wiki
.
Putative Marriage
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putative_marriage
Thank you for your assistance.
P
Phemie
Guest
I presume you live in a country where the civil marriage is celebrated before the Church marriage. In Canada and, as far as I know, all US states and countries like Italy & England, a marriage celebrated in Church is also a civil marriage.
In Canada, depending on the province, the couple must either have a marriage license &/or have banns published. In either case, the priest must file paperwork with the government after the wedding. I know, I’ve often been the one to prepare the paperwork for the bride and groom, witnesses and the priest to sign and then to take them to the government office.
Sometimes when only one recognizes the need for a convalidation (often the Catholic in a mixed-marriage) the priest will petition the bishop for a radical sanation, which literally means “healing at the root”. It’s a convalidation which doesn’t require the couple to exchange consent again. The Catholic spouse could get a radical sanation without the non-Catholic spouse’s consent or knowledge.
It’s also the means for a priest who discovers that a marriage was invalidly celebrated, through no fault of the couple (for instance, a failure to get a dispensation for a Catholic to marry a non-baptized person) to rectify the situation without involving the couple who, in fact, need never know about it.
A
Abba
Guest
Interesting. :coffeeread:
I thought the Catholic Church for decades has required a marriage license/legal marriage in order for the Church ceremony to take place and this every where. It is because of this change or different practice in different countries that the person mentioned in the OP assumed that the Church marriage was also the legal marriage as it was the case back in the days in his country of origin. However, in the United States, although the government may recognize religious ceremonies that had at least two witnesses I understand the Church requires the marriage license which was the case in the OP.
I was married in France, and the Church there requires the marriage licenses and so a legal marriage previous to the Church marriage.
I can understand that the Church has the God given liberty to marry people without requiring a legal marriage previous to the Sacrament. I imagine the scenario of a country at war or plagued by disease or natural destruction etc… and the government office are non-functional; the Church would be free to offer the Sacrament of Marriage regardless of a marriage license, so the Church is not really bound.
This sounds peculiar. So, a non-Catholic could be married in the Catholic Church without knowing it?
By rectifying the situation they are making the original marriage valid. The correction is applied to the past? Interesting.
P
Phemie
Guest
In the US and Canada, a priest who is celebrating a convalidation would require a marriage certificate which proves that the couple is legally married. Because they are already legally married, the ceremony has no legal implications, it involves only the Church.
A marriage certificate is different from a marriage license, which is a document that gives the couple legal permission to get married, and the priest permission to celebrate the wedding. In the province of Ontario, if the couple has their banns published in church they don’t need a marriage license.
In my province, a couple applies for a marriage licence within 30 days of their wedding. Once it’s issued they bring it to the parish. We fill out all the required information on the “Registration of Marriage” form (including their names, where they were born, their religion, the names of their parents, where they were born and their religion) and have everything ready for the couple, their witnesses and the priest to sign at the same time as they sign the parish register at the end of the wedding ceremony. Once everything is signed and dated, we take or send it back to the office where the couple got their marriage license.
True, although the Church will usually follow the law of the land unless it’s an unjust law. For example, the Church will celebrate a secret marriage of people of different races if such a marriage is forbidden by civil law because such a law is unjust.
The marriage could be recognized by the Church as valid without his knowledge. This usually occurs when the non-Catholic believes he’s already validly married and refuses to have a simple convalidation. It usually doesn’t matter to this person that the Church doesn’t recognize the marriage as valid but it matters to the Catholic spouse. A radical sanation recognizes both positions and rectifies the situation.
The effects are retroactive, but the marriage date is the date that the radical sanation was granted.
1
1ke
Guest
No, this isn’t correct. In the US and Canada, the preist or deacon is the civil officiant in addition to being the Church witness. Therefore, the priest/deacon must perform the duties of the civil officiant and report the marriage to the state and fill out the paperwork after the marriage. The priest or deacon must sign the marriage license (which the couple must present to him) and then the priest/deacon must return that license to the civil governmetn (county clerk’s office in the US) to register the marriage civilly. Additionally, the priest or deacon must enter the record of the marriage in the sacramental records of the Church.
In the case of convalidation, the civil marriage license/registration of the marriage showing the civil marriage already took place must be given to the priest/deacon. The convalidation is the exchange of consent in the Catholic form and is recorded only in the sacramental records.
Correct, this is how it works in places like Europe. The couple marries civilly and must provide evidence of that to the priest marrying them in the Church. The priest does not report anything to the state as he is not the state officiant.
No.
T
Thomas_Casey
Guest
Good subject for Liturgy and Sacraments. Please post appropriately.
CLOSED.
CLOSED.
J
johndoe100
Guest
I may have used Camon 1055 wrong in these marriage threads? 1ke pointed out my error. The reason I used 1055 is because both my wife and I are Baptised Roman Catholics who were married by a Protestant Minister.
I still haven’t changed my position about forum members posting Canon that condemn married people. There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. (Roman 8:1) When people come onboard to ask questions we should give them the benefit of being in Christ Jesus. Why would they post here if they weren’t?
I still haven’t changed my position about forum members posting Canon that condemn married people. There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. (Roman 8:1) When people come onboard to ask questions we should give them the benefit of being in Christ Jesus. Why would they post here if they weren’t?
- Status