Would you date a divorced (or almost divorced) person?

[Della]

Would you date a divorced protestant? They would have no reason to have their marriage annulled, so, would you?

I’m afraid that’s not true, if the divorced Protestant wanted to marry a Catholic. S/he would have to get an annulment from the Church before entering into marriage with a Catholic.

And going out to dinner with the intent to date a potential spouse could be a “near occasion of sin”–because of what it could lead to. Better to regularize one’s marital status with the Church first rather than get feelings involved where they cannot be fulfilled.

 

[exnihilo]

I hope I wouldn’t date a person who had not received an annulment. A divorce is a civil action. And as far as Christians, any Christian, goes the Bible is very clear about divorce. I remember as a Protestant wondering how Jesus’ words squared with practice. The answer is it didn’t. They just ignored him because they found it inconvenient. This isn’t to say that I don’t find the number of annulments granted deeply disturbing.

Personally I’ve always been wary of divorced folks. I often wondered about the value of their word since they often vowed before God to love someone until they died. The next time they’ll take their vow seriously? The divorced person is never the cause of the failed marriage. They are at most responsible just a little bit. The spouse was always the bad guy.

As someone whose parents were divorced I hate divorce. It is a grave evil treated by most as a little bump on the road of life. It is the selfishness of parents above their children’s interests. A divorced person could chose to live a celibate life in penance for his breaking of vows and harm to his children. But who even considers that these days?

 

[SusanneT]

I’m afraid that’s not true, if the divorced Protestant wanted to marry a Catholic. S/he would have to get an annulment from the Church before entering into marriage with a Catholic.

And going out to dinner with the intent to date a potential spouse could be a “near occasion of sin”–because of what it could lead to. Better to regularize one’s marital status with the Church first rather than get feelings involved where they cannot be fulfilled.

I agree - I think ‘dating’ is taken too casually anyway. If it is as it should be getting to know someone with the intent to marry then it you would need to know for sure that their marriage was annulled and for reasons beyond their control.

 

[nodito]

For those who say no, what other options are there for single Catholics?

How about… Dating those who have never been married, dating those who have been widowed or are widowers, dating those who have been divorced but received an annulment, or not dating at all.

 

[Bataar]

I would only if the other person would pursue and annulment and, from what I know of the situation, a reasonable chance for annulment exists. That’s probably due to some desperation at this point though.

 

[SuperHappy]

There is no such thing as “almost divorced.”

Almost divorced is still married.

 

[Della]

There is no such thing as “almost divorced.”

Almost divorced is still married.

Indeed. A better question would be: “Would you date a person seeking an annulment,” since we are discussing remarriage per canon law, not civil law.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

BlueEyedLady:

So, based on your prior posts you think sexual history is completely irrelevant to the success of a marriage, but you think marital history IS relevant, to the point you would avoid divorced people. What about people who don’t get married, but are in long term relationships that involve sex? Many such relationships include cohabitation and/or produce children, and when they end, this results in the breakup of those families.

So, is such a history still considered a mere “sexual history” and thus irrelevant, or is it relevant after all?

As someone who is pushing 40 myself and still single, I wouldn’t go as far as to say as all single people are divorced" at age 40. I can think of many single people who are 40 and older who have never been married. One such woman married a friend of mine.

That being said, being single after age 40 in general would require some discernment as to why that person is still single. Some may just be unlucky. Some have been in long term relationships but not legally married. Some may be very immature (this was the case for one 40 year old I dated when I was 30).

However, that doesn’t mean all such people should be barred from consideration. My friends marriage to a then 40 year old woman, has been very happy so far.

I understand being wary of a divorced person but I also agree with **holyrood **that a blanket “NO” is going to rule out some people who would make good spouses. And people certainly have the right to make that decision. But the issue here, on a Catholic forum, is not just about whether dating a divorced person is prudent. It’s also a question of whether it’s considered adultery.

As someone whose parents were divorced I hate divorce. It is a grave evil treated by most as a little bump on the road of life. It is the selfishness of parents above their children’s interests. A divorced person could chose to live a celibate life in penance for his breaking of vows and harm to his children. But who even considers that these days?

While certainly there are people who minimize their own contribution to a breakup, there certainly ARE cases of abandoned spouses, who did not wish to be divorced, but the reality of no-fault divorce is that one spouse CAN decide to unilaterally end a marriage.

There is a divorced person, holyrood, who posted on this topic. I really hope your comments are not directed at her. As I do recall her prior posts and she did NOT get a divorce on a whim.

I would only if the other person would pursue and annulment and, from what I know of the situation, a reasonable chance for annulment exists. That’s probably due to some desperation at this point though.

It does seem those who reply “yes” have cited some sense of “desperation”.

Anyway, to everyone who has posted “yes” to this question I also want to ask, do you actually consider dating a “divorced person” to be adultery, or only if you have sex with that person.

Also, do people really care if a divorced person has an annulment or not; it seems the prudent reasons to avoid people with such “baggage” would exist whether or not an annulment exists. And while I admit to being outside the Church and cynical, it seems that in the overwhelming majority of divorce cases, a decree of nullity is not a question of “if” but “when”, it may take many months or even years but will eventually happen.

(At least this seems to be the case in the US, I realize it isn’t the case in other countries.)

SuperHappy I agree “almost divorced” is still married, but that’s not how most secular people see it. They start dating as soon as they realize the marriage is over, and many single people also see it as irrelevant that the person is still “technically” married and so even “chaste” dating would count as adultery.

 

[exnihilo]

While certainly there are people who minimize their own contribution to a breakup, there certainly ARE cases of abandoned spouses, who did not wish to be divorced, but the reality of no-fault divorce is that one spouse CAN decide to unilaterally end a marriage.

There is a divorced person, holyrood, who posted on this topic. I really hope your comments are not directed at her. As I do recall her prior posts and she did NOT get a divorce on a whim.

In my experience it isn’t some people who minimize their contributions but everyone. At the very least I think those who don’t are very much the exception. We live in exceptionally selfish times. This is to be expected.

You are right that no fault divorce and society’s acceptance have made it easy for a marriage to end in divorce. There is also abandonment. Of course that doesn’t end the marriage vow. In Catholic teaching a marriage is either valid or invalid when contracted. Nothing that occurs after changes the validity.

My comments are directed to no one in particular. And I’m not passing judgement on particular situations. I also realize that this is a difficult situation due to our modern culture. However the feelings and troubles of adults don’t compare to those of the many children who are seriously harmed by our divorce culture.

 

[jmcrae]

Do you not think two people can go out and have dinner without it being sin?

If I’m cultivating a friendship with a view to discerning marriage, then I’d be jumping the gun or getting ahead of myself if I’m not yet (and might not ever be) free to marry.

 

[Sugabee43]

I was inspired to post this by a recent Popular Media topic about a NYT article gushing over the recent marriage of 2 people, yet glossing over the fact that when they “fell in love” they were married to other people.

Now, certainly I know the party line is “no, until/unless there is an annulment, dating a divorced person is adultery”, that is the reply I’d get if I posted this in Moral Theology.

But it seems that in practice, most Catholics find it perfectly legitimate to date a divorced person, and most Catholics who apply for annulment already have a prospective spouse in mind, sometimes they are already engaged. I’ve even read posters on CAF state that “there is no reason to apply for annulment unless you want to remarry” and the posts make it obvious they don’t mean “unless you want to remarry someday in the future” but “unless you find someone who makes you want to remarry”.

In the secular world, it seems people make no distinction at all between “divorced” and “about to be divorced”, they don’t consider it to be adultery at all to date someone who is technically married but won’t be much longer. Some even don’t find it adultery to date someone who is legally separated, even if that person might not be committed to ending the marriage.

Then of course there are those who claim “I’m getting divorced” but aren’t actually planning on leaving their spouses, they just use that as a way to seduce people who might otherwise not want to be “the other man” or “other woman”.

Anyway, all this being said, would you personally find it acceptable to date a divorced or separated person if there was no chance at all the first marriage would recover. Do you think this would only be adultery if you had sex? Or, what if you were convinced the first marriage is invalid (or are just cynically assuming the Tribunal will grant the annulment as a matter of course)?

ETA: And regarding cheaters who lie about getting divorced, I can think of a true-crime case about a man who was cheating on his wife, who killed her. Sadly not that uncommon in the true crime genre, but the answer to the question that often comes up of “why didn’t he just get a divorce”, had a twist, a very twisted one at that.

See, he’d lied to his mistress that not only was he getting divorced, he wasn’t even having sex with his wife anymore – only to have the wife get pregnant. Oops. Afraid to lose the mistress if she found he was “cheating” on her, he chose to murder his wife, (and unborn child), before the pregnancy became public. The mistress herself was cleared of involvement in the murder. But it’s ironic that she’d be angry at her lover for “cheating” on her with his own wife.

As someone whose (ex) husband has divorced me (meaning, I didn’t want it but couldn’t stop it), the answer is and will be a resounding “NO” unless and until an annulment is granted.

If that means that I will never date anyone ever again, and/or never marry again, I’m okay with that. My relationship to Jesus is WAY more important to me than whether I have a date to go to the movies. That’s what my twin sister is for. LOL

 

[BlueEyedLady]

BlueEyedLady:

So, based on your prior posts you think sexual history is completely irrelevant to the success of a marriage, but you think marital history IS relevant, to the point you would avoid divorced people. What about people who don’t get married, but are in long term relationships that involve sex? Many such relationships include cohabitation and/or produce children, and when they end, this results in the breakup of those families.

So, is such a history still considered a mere “sexual history” and thus irrelevant, or is it relevant after all?

Well, prior marriage or not I’m not at a point where I would consider being a stepparent. That’s an enormous undertaking and something I’ve never been up for.

Having been in a long-term sexual relationships as well as married, they’re different. To take the plunge from living together to married is a big deal, especially when you’re young. Sexual or romantic history is one thing, being the second person my husband publicly makes vows to, particularly in such a short amount of time is a no-go. I’m not a second wife, second in-law, or second attempt at a family.

It’s one thing when you’re older and there’s more time between the marriage, divorce, and being back out on the market. But I have no interest in someone who got married, divorced, and is ready to try again all in under 10 years. That’s the result of poor judgement/life decisions or a flippant attitude towards marriage. If it’s the first, there needs to be more time to move on and grow. If it’s the latter, no thanks period.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

As someone whose (ex) husband has divorced me (meaning, I didn’t want it but couldn’t stop it), the answer is and will be a resounding “NO” unless and until an annulment is granted.

If that means that I will never date anyone ever again, and/or never marry again, I’m okay with that. My relationship to Jesus is WAY more important to me than whether I have a date to go to the movies. That’s what my twin sister is for. LOL

Thank you for showing me a very principled stance on the Catholic faith and understanding of marriage, even if it’s something that might go against your interests from a secular POV. It seems many divorced Catholics have an entitled “I DESERVE a second chance at a happy marriage” attitude, and some of course go on to marry outside the Church. It’s good to know not everyone has that attitude.

Having been in a long-term sexual relationships as well as married, they’re different. To take the plunge from living together to married is a big deal, especially when you’re young. Sexual or romantic history is one thing, being the second person my husband publicly makes vows to, particularly in such a short amount of time is a no-go. I’m not a second wife, second in-law, or second attempt at a family.

It’s one thing when you’re older and there’s more time between the marriage, divorce, and being back out on the market. But I have no interest in someone who got married, divorced, and is ready to try again all in under 10 years. That’s the result of poor judgement/life decisions or a flippant attitude towards marriage. If it’s the first, there needs to be more time to move on and grow. If it’s the latter, no thanks period.

Fair enough; I actually commend you for taking marriage seriously. There are many people out there who see marriage as “just a piece of paper”, and a wedding as NOT the start of a new chapter in a relationship, but just a big party to celebrate a committed relationship that already exists.

 

[tiffanyzoe]

I am an almost divorced woman of 32. My husband left me without even saying goodbye and I’ve never seen him since. That was a little over a year ago.
Don’t judge a book by its’ cover. Or I guess, don’t judge a person’s character because of their marital status. Did I want that to happen? Absolutely not. I was humiliated that he threw his marriage out and myself out like trash. Humiliated.
I had no choice in it, therefore I had to make a choice to divorce him. Which makes me a divorcee. If someone is so self- righteous that they would judge me as a woman and a person because I am divorced, then they really are only thinking of themselves.

 

[EnglishTeacher]

Anyway, all this being said, would you personally find it acceptable to date a divorced or separated person if there was no chance at all the first marriage would recover.

No.

Do you think this would only be adultery if you had sex?

No, still adultery.

Or, what if you were convinced the first marriage is invalid (or are just cynically assuming the Tribunal will grant the annulment as a matter of course)?

It’s not up to me to decide whether the marriage is invalid. Also, even though it seems most annulments that are applied for are granted, you still never know for sure; and therefore it is imprudent on practical grounds as well as wrong on moral grounds.

As a single person, I was not willing to date divorced men who did not have an annulment. In theory, I was open to dating a divorced man who did have an annulment, depending on his situation, but in practice, I ended up dating only men who had never been married. (This was mainly because I wasn’t sure that I was ready to navigate the terrain of a past attempt at marriage, particularly if it involved children. It was not because I viewed people with annullments as “less than” in any way.)

 

[Sugabee43]

Thank you. In all seriousness, my twin sister has never married. She has (somewhat reluctantly at first, to be honest) offered up her singleness to God and has been a source of inspiration to me. Perhaps this whole episode of my life is Him calling me to unite myself as much as possible to His Sacred Heart.

In any case, I will not sacrifice my heavenly crown for a few moment’s artificial joy. Been there; done that. Not that awesome.

 

[AdamP88]

Anyway, all this being said, would you personally find it acceptable to date a divorced or separated person if there was no chance at all the first marriage would recover. Do you think this would only be adultery if you had sex? Or, what if you were convinced the first marriage is invalid (or are just cynically assuming the Tribunal will grant the annulment as a matter of course)?

I wouldn’t find it acceptable. Yes. It is adultery. I think the definition of adultery is if you have sex with a person who is not your wife. So, technically it wouldn’t be adultery until you had sex. I would consider it cheating though.

I wouldn’t find it acceptable to “date” someone in the annulment process either. The marriage is considered valid until proved otherwise. So, technically…still cheating/adultery.

In my opinion, I think unmarried people who are living with a long term partner are slightly better than people who cheat on their spouse in any way, shape, or form. At least the former are being honest.

 

[Bataar]

It does seem those who reply “yes” have cited some sense of “desperation”.

Anyway, to everyone who has posted “yes” to this question I also want to ask, do you actually consider dating a “divorced person” to be adultery, or only if you have sex with that person.

Desperate people use desperate measures. To be fair though, I have no expectations of dating anyone so this is pretty meaningless for me. I was merely stating an opinion.

I wouldn’t think it’s adultery to date a divorced person. I would only consider sex an act of adultery.

 

[steve93]

I am an almost divorced woman of 32. My husband left me without even saying goodbye and I’ve never seen him since. That was a little over a year ago.
Don’t judge a book by its’ cover. Or I guess, don’t judge a person’s character because of their marital status. Did I want that to happen? Absolutely not. I was humiliated that he threw his marriage out and myself out like trash. Humiliated.
I had no choice in it, therefore I had to make a choice to divorce him. Which makes me a divorcee. If someone is so self- righteous that they would judge me as a woman and a person because I am divorced, then they really are only thinking of themselves.

Exactly my point. Why should someone ruin their life over someone else’s evil deeds to entertain some geriatric theologian’s delusions of “moral utopia”?

 

[AdamP88]

I am an almost divorced woman of 32. My husband left me without even saying goodbye and I’ve never seen him since. That was a little over a year ago.
Don’t judge a book by its’ cover. Or I guess, don’t judge a person’s character because of their marital status. Did I want that to happen? Absolutely not. I was humiliated that he threw his marriage out and myself out like trash. Humiliated.
I had no choice in it, therefore I had to make a choice to divorce him. Which makes me a divorcee. If someone is so self- righteous that they would judge me as a woman and a person because I am divorced, then they really are only thinking of themselves.

What do you mean by judging you though?

If I met a woman who told me the story you just told. I’d have to say: “I’m sorry I can’t date you.” It’s not a judgement. It’s the fact that you are still married, even if divorced.

There’s a difference between judging you and someone wishing to follow the faith and making a moral judgement that they, in good conscience, couldn’t date you.