Yet Another Annulment Question

[rick43235]

Where do we draw the line between seeking annulment as a quest for truth, and seeking annulment as a form of convenience to stay in good graces with the church??

As one who has been struggling with the idea of an annulment off and on for the past few years, the above quote from another thread has prompted me to revisit the subject. Quick background – I was baptized and raised in the Lutheran Church but have not really practiced any religion since becoming an adult. I was previously married to another protestant in her church, but after eight years my wife and I divorced and I remained single for many years. Five years ago, much to my surprise and to the surprise of everyone who knows me, a miracle occurred - I got married again. My wife is from another country where almost everyone is Catholic, and the fact that she is Catholic is very much a part of how she identifies herself. Although there are many Catholic teachings that I have serious doubts about (in fact, I have some serious doubts about the very existence of God), in the interest of family harmony, I attend mass with my wife every Sunday. I have found that there are some good people there, and I enjoy being a part of the parish community. My wife and I even do some volunteer work there. So far, no one seems to object to my (non-Catholic) presence there, although there is one gentleman who, upon finding out that I was Lutheran, tries to engage me in some spirited, good-natured arguments. (He can’t get too critical because he is married to a Lutheran.)

Due to immigration regulations which imposed a time limit on when we could get married, my wife and I got married in a civil ceremony with the idea of having our marriage “blessed by the church” when we could get the requirements sorted out. As a non-Catholic, I didn’t have a clue what those requirements would be, but I never would have dreamed that the fact that I was previously married to another non-Catholic in a non- Catholic ceremony would enter into it. My wife, who is not only a cradle Catholic who attended Catholic schools all her life, but also spent many years working for the Church and interacted on a daily basis with many priests, was also blissfully ignorant of the effect my previous marriage would have. We met with a priest who was very kind and helpfully explained the annulment process to me. But, when I took the papers home and began to realize what was really required, my reaction, was, “This is a bunch of horse***t,” (Yikes!!! the CAF bad-word program didn’t catch that. I had to censor it myself!!) and the papers have been gathering dust in a file drawer ever since.

Fast forward to the present- although my wife has tried to assure me that the fact that our marriage is considered to be invalid by the Church is not something that really concerns her, and that she very much understands my negative feelings about pursuing an annulment, I suspect that she would prefer to be in the good graces of the Church. After a few years of struggling with the idea, I have decided that, although I still think it’s a bunch of horse***t, I would apply for an annulment so that we could get our marriage convalidated and my wife could again be in “full communion” with the Church.

This brings me to the point of this lengthy post. To be honest, to me, this will be nothing but a painfully annoying exercise that I am suffering through for the sake of my wife. I don’t believe that the ruling of the tribunal will have anything to do with the truth regarding the validity of my first marriage, nor do I believe that a convalidation will make us any more married than we are today. So…is it worth it to go through the annulment process just “as a form of convenience to stay in good graces with the church?” (As the poster above wondered.)

Sorry for the length.

 

[otjm]

Yes, for her sake and understanding of her faith, if for no other reason.

I can understand some of your objections. Lutherans (depending where you are on their spectrum) may have more of an understanding of sacraments, or less (depending, as noted, on what part of the Lutheran Church you were raised). The Catholic Church’s understanding of sacraments is different from the Lutherans, and the difference varies as to which part you belong(ed).

The Catholic Church takes marriage as a very serious proposition; if the parties are free to marry and without any impediments, the Church considers it to be a sacramental marriage, a permanent covenant between husband and wife, and that is whether they are Catholic or not (but baptized). So the Church, without any investigation, presumes your first marriage to be a sacrament and permanent covenant until death of one of the parties.

As to your comment about the truth about the first marriage, the Church whole-heartedly agrees with you. The ruling of the tribunal seeks to establish beyond the presumption whether or not your marriage was sacramental in truth. The tribunal, if it reaches a decision (that is, if you go all the way to a decision) will either find that the marriage was a valid sacrament, or that something was lacking on the day of the marriage which prevented the parties from making such a covenant (but not from making a “State valid contract”). The Church considers marriage to be a covenant; the State does not; it sees marriage as a contract between two parties as long as they both wish to maintain the contract, and like other contracts, can be broken if one of the parties no longer wishes to be bound.

Should the Church tribunal proceed to a decision and find that your first marriage was a valid sacrament, then the result would be that your current spouse would be living in objective adultery, as the Church would find that your first marriage was a permanent covenant and not divisible by divorce (the Church does not recognize a State divorce as having any impact on a sacramental marriage). At this point, we take the biblical commetns about marriage and divorce by Christ very seriously.

Should the Church tribunal proceed to a decision and find that for some reason the first marriage was not a sacramental covenant (and thus permanent) then they would hold that you are free to marry. Church rules require that a Catholic, to form a sacramental covenant, must marry in front of a priest who is the official witness. Which is why the requirement to have the marriage convalidated.

Perhaps another way to look at the question: even though you may not understand or agree with her Church, if the situation were reversed on a very serious matter and she would need to go through a long process (and not a particularly easy or friendly one) in order for you to be “square with God”, would you want her to accomodate your needs and wishes?

It is not an easy process, and it can seem overly intrusive. It may seem silly, completely worthless, empty of meaning to you, and that is understandable. If she is following the laws of the Church, she should not be receiving Communion, and that is a major cut-off from her faith. The question may be, given the first two sentances of this paragraph, do you love her enough to accomodate her on something that she and perhaps even more, her Church, feels is absolutely necessary? That is not meant to be harsh, but to put it into perspective.

 

[puzzleannie]

there are two alternatives

1. the Catholic Church can, as she does in fact, regard all marriages contracted between non-Catholics who are otherwise free to marry as valid.

OR

1. the Catholic Church can regard NO marriage contracted by anyone other than two Catholics who marry in accord with Church law as valid

Which do you think is most in keeping with the teachings of Christ, charity and the ontological nature of marriage itself?

 

[Chatter163]

I guess that I am confused because you state:

My wife is from another country where almost everyone is Catholic, and the fact that she is Catholic is very much a part of how she identifies herself.

and

I attend mass with my wife every Sunday… My wife and I even do some volunteer work there.

and

My wife, who is not only a cradle Catholic who attended Catholic schools all her life, but also spent many years working for the Church and interacted on a daily basis with many priests…,

but then you state:

[My wife] was also blissfully ignorant of the effect my previous marriage would have.

and

my wife has tried to assure me that the fact that our marriage is considered to be invalid by the Church is not something that really concerns her

Is she a devout Catholic or not? Help!

 

[EasterJoy]

I don’t understand the question, I guess. Does the OP wonder whether or not or why the Church herself would be particularly interested in the truth of whether or not he is currently unmarried and free to marry his wife? Is it really the Church’s business to make certain that her children don’t marry men who are already married to someone else?

Well, of course the Church cares and of course it is the Church’s business. It can involve a lot of paperwork, true, but the Church would be remiss if she did not make certain all parties were free to marry before performing any marriages.

If you want to be married in the Catholic Church, you also have to live with the fact that it is the Church, not the state, you, or your intended Catholic spouse, who discerns what it means for her children and their intended spouses to be free to marry. No matter what part of equine husbandry that brings to mind, that’s the way it is.

 

[EasterJoy]

Is she a devout Catholic or not? Help!

If she wants to approach Holy Communion in a state of grace, she may not live as wife in a marriage that the Church does not recognize as valid. If the couple wants to be married in the Catholic Church, they have to demonstrate that all parties are free to marry. Unless one thinks that sacrilege is only a matter of worry for the “devout”, neither his devotion nor hers really comes into it.

It is totally understandable that a Christian from a denomination that allows divorce does not get what the fuss is about. We aren’t one of those denominations, though. For us, establishing nullity is a big deal, because divorce is not an option. One may as well expect the Lutherans or the state not to care if a marriage amounts to bigamy, even by their standards. Since he was previously married, they would require proof to their satisfaction that all previous marriages were either null or ended in divorce before performing another marriage. This really isn’t any different.

 

[rick43235]

Is she a devout Catholic or not? Help!

I suspect that your definition of a “devout Catholic” is one who would never question any teaching, doctrine, or dogma of the Church. Using that definition, I would have to say that she is not. In fact, her Catholicism is probably as much cultural as it is religious. Still, it is very much a part of who she is, and I suspect that she would prefer that our marriage was recognized by the Church.

 

[EasterJoy]

I suspect that your definition of a “devout Catholic” is one who would never question any teaching, doctrine, or dogma of the Church. Using that definition, I would have to say that she is not. In fact, her Catholicism is probably as much cultural as it is religious. Still, it is very much a part of who she is, and I suspect that she would prefer that our marriage was recognized by the Church.

I don’t mean this as a barb, but it isn’t fair to expect a Lutheran to automatically equate devotion to Christ with docility to the paperwork requirements of Rome. Fair enough!

If your wife wants to have the marriage recognized by the Church–as it deserves to be, by the way–jump through the hoops. It can be a bit onerous, but Church isn’t trying to punish you two. It is simply the process by which the Church documents the truth. In spite of cynical suspicions to the contrary, the Church does not look at the annulment process and the search for truth as two separate things.

There is a lot of that in this life. In the big scheme of things, it is really one of our lesser crosses. Looking back on the length of your married life, I think you’ll be glad you did it. Your wife is devoted enough to the Catholic Church to care about this, and you are obviously devoted enough to jump flaming hoops for her. So there you are.

 

[H_Opey]

Reason to have your marriage convalidated: because of the graces - it is a sacrament. And if you aren’t Catholic, then doing it for your wife would be a good thing in my opinion. We receive graces need to carry out our vocation - that is important.

I think I would suffer through the Q&A for my wife and start do some serious praying.

Because your wife didn’t know all of this is not surprising to me at all.
She is not alone. Plus, the ins and outs of annulments, etc, are confusing and frustrating unless you have dealt with it personally before. In other words, she should have known we are supposed to marry in the Church from CCD classes - but not necessarily about annulments, etc.

God speed you. As soon as she can get her marriage convalidated, she can return to the sacraments also.

 

[rick43235]

Looking back on the length of your married life, I think you’ll be glad you did it. Your wife is devoted enough to the Catholic Church to care about this, and you are obviously devoted enough to jump flaming hoops for her. So there you are.

I think I would suffer through the Q&A for my wife and start do some serious praying.

God speed you. As soon as she can get her marriage convalidated, she can return to the sacraments also.

Thank you both for your kind thoughts.

 

[Vico]

…I was baptized and raised in the Lutheran Church but have not really practiced any religion since becoming an adult. I was previously married to another protestant in her church, but after eight years my wife and I divorced…

…my wife and I got married in a civil ceremony with the idea of having our marriage “blessed by the church” when we could get the requirements sorted out …

I don’t believe that the ruling of the tribunal will have anything to do with the truth regarding the validity of my first marriage, nor do I believe that a convalidation will make us any more married than we are today. …

The Catholic Church recognizes Protestant, interfaith and most civil marriages as valid for non-Catholics, because they are not bound as Catholics are to the Catholic form of marriage. Once the Catholic Church recognizes a marriage contract as valid, then the question of invalidity must be addressed by the Church.

By marrying in a civil ceremony, you are not actually a married Catholic couple, but unmarried, because she is Catholic and is bound to marry in the Church. Convalidation will require making the marriage covenant for the first time! It might turn our that you two do not understand that covenant and so may have a different idea of what marriage is. The essentials are perpetual, exclusive, and intention of children and of raising them as Catholic, and that it is a sacrament between the baptised. Also impediments must be delt with, if any, like previous marriage.

 

[Seatuck]

I suspect that your definition of a “devout Catholic” is one who would never question any teaching, doctrine, or dogma of the Church. Using that definition, I would have to say that she is not. In fact, her Catholicism is probably as much cultural as it is religious. Still, it is very much a part of who she is, and I suspect that she would prefer that our marriage was recognized by the Church.

Does she go up to receive communion? Go to Confession? People in invalid marriages are not permitted to present themselves for the sacraments until they are in a place where they are working to fix the situation.

It may not bother her so much because she is oblivious to the serious trouble she is in as the church views her as putting herself outside the community. Or you may be right it is more of a cultural thing for her.

It would be very kind and loving of you to proceed and file the paperwork. Many people find that although it is difficult to do that in the end they get a lot of healing out of it and it actually improves the current marriage.

 

[Vico]

From “Canon law on marriage: introductory notes and comments” by Adolfo N. Dacanáy, S.J., (2000, Loyola School of Theology), p. 8 is stated that when those bound to observe the canonical form of marriage form do not (meaning a Catholic in a civil marriage for example), the result does not constitute a putative marriage.

Putative means commonly reputed to be valid, but actually invalid due to either 1) a diriment impediment or 2) lack of good faith by both (e.g., by intention to exclude children, or to be non-exclusive, or to be temporary).

 

[Phemie]

From “Canon law on marriage: introductory notes and comments” by Adolfo N. Dacanáy, S.J., (2000, Loyola School of Theology), p. 8 is stated that when those bound to observe the canonical form of marriage form do not (meaning a Catholic in a civil marriage for example), the result does not constitute a putative marriage.

Putative means commonly reputed to be valid, but actually invalid due to either 1) a diriment impediment or 2) lack of good faith by both (e.g., by intention to exclude children, or to be non-exclusive, or to be temporary).

That has been said on these boards many times: There is no presumption of validity unless the Catholic marries according to canonical form or is dispensed from it. That’s why an annulment is not necessary with these marriages – producing the necessary documents to show defect of form is usually all that is required.

 

[rick43235]

It would be very kind and loving of you to proceed and file the paperwork. Many people find that although it is difficult to do that in the end they get a lot of healing out of it and it actually improves the current marriage.

Well, we are very happily married as it is, so I don’t anticipate much in the way of “healing.” I have, however, dusted off the application and it is now on my desk rather than hidden away in a filing cabinet. A step in the right direction, I guess.

Thank you for your thoughts.

 

[rick43235]

By marrying in a civil ceremony, you are not actually a married Catholic couple, but unmarried…

Well, even if I got an annulment and our marriage was convalidated, we still would not be a “married Catholic couple” - I’m not Catholic. And while I understand that the Church does not recognize the validity of our marriage, to say that we’re “unmarried” - well, that’s just silly.

 

[agapewolf]

Well, even if I got an annulment and our marriage was convalidated, we still would not be a “married Catholic couple” - I’m not Catholic. And while I understand that the Church does not recognize the validity of our marriage, to say that we’re “unmarried” - well, that’s just silly.

No, its not. If there were no such thing as civil marriages, you wouldn’t be married. Just because according to the law you are “married” does not mean that you really are.

 

[rick43235]

If there were no such thing as civil marriages, you wouldn’t be married.

Well, there ARE such things as civil marriages. I know this because I was married at one.

Just because according to the law you are “married” does not mean that you really are.

This is taking the silliness to a whole new level.

 

[SpaceNeedle]

Well, there ARE such things as civil marriages. I know this because I was married at one.

This is taking the silliness to a whole new level.

If I may…

A Catholic can be married to a Lutheran, and it can be a valid marriage.

A Catholic can be married to an atheist, a buddhist, a sikh…you name it, and it can be a valid marriage.

There’s only one thing the Church asks: that you follow their wishes are far as pre-cana/marriage prep, and that you have no pre-existing marriage that has not been declared null.

Hardly seems crazy.

I have applied for, and been granted, a declaration of nullity. It was a pain in the ____. The marriage was brief, and at the time I had been an unbaptised agnostic who simply got duped. I did not need the declaration to return to the sacraments, nor to help anyone I love return to the sacraments, but can only imagine I would have filled it out twice as fast if this were the case.

You say you do not need “healing”. Excellent! This puts you in a much better position than I was in, as this will make your application a piece of cake. I myself was very wounded, and it was therefore a very painful process to begin. If you feel 100% ok talking about what transpired in your first marriage, this is going to be easy.

You love your wife, your wife loves her faith, to me this follows under the category of “no brainer”. Yeah, it will require a little effort, but I am sure your wife will be pleased.

 

[agapewolf]

Well, there ARE such things as civil marriages. I know this because I was married at one.

This is taking the silliness to a whole new level.

No it isn’t. God is the one that joins people in marriage, NOT the government. The church in her charity, recognizes that non-Catholics may use different means to get married, but it has EVERY right to set rules down for its members in how they approach marriage. This creates a reality that exists that we cannot see. It’s not silly at all.

God joins people in marriage, not the government. just because our country has civil marriages does not mean that it crosses over to reality of God’s laws. The country also allows abortions, that doesn’t mean that the church should then too.

Just because someone has a birthday party does not make it their birthday.