Does my ex-husband need to get an annulment before he remarries?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

My ex-husband is Catholic. I am Methodist. We were married in the Methodist church. He had an affair with an employee of his. We got divorced and now he is going to marry his lover. She is Baptist but is converting to Catholicism. They are planning to have a Catholic church wedding this summer. He claims that since we were not married in the Catholic church, our marraige never existed so he does not need an annulment. Is he correct?

-- Sherri Warner (sherri@abshop.com), February 28, 2001

Answers

from http://www.icctampa.org/previous.htm

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PRESUMES EVERY MARRIAGE between a man and a woman who are free to marry (Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Non-Believer, etc) to be a VALID marriage until the opposite is proven. Therefore a divorced non-catholic also needs to obtain a Catholic declaration of nullity or dissolution before he. she is allowed to marry in the Catholic Church. A declaration of nullity concludes that from the very outset of the union under consideration something basic was lacking. ... WITNESSES are required by Church Law to assist the Tribunal is a deeper understand of you, your former spouse and your union. Please name people who knew you, or preferably, both of you prior to and during the union and who have indicated they are willing to answer a questionnaire which will be mailed to them by the Tribunal. (Parents, brothers, sisters, mutual friends, members of the wedding party, usually make excellent witnesses. We ask that you DO NOT name children of the union.)

After all the testimony (which is considered confidential and made available only to those as may be authorized by Church Law) has been gathered, an appointment for an INTERVIEW at the Tribunal will be set for you to meet with a Judge or an Auditor. Following this interview the Defender of the Bond and your Advocate will offer their views. After reviewing all of the material the Judge will render a decision.

Church Law also requires that every case which has received an affirmative decision in our Tribunal must be reviewed by the Court of Appeals for the Province of Florida which is the Archdiocese of Miami. This Court will either confirm our decision, deny our decision or open up the case to a new grade of trial.

When a final decision has been reached you will be notified.

There are no CIVIL EFFECTS to a Church declaration of nullity. IT DOES NOT AFFECT IN ANY MANNER THE LEGITIMACY OF CHILDREN, PROPERTY RIGHTS, INHERITANCE RIGHTS, NAMES, ETC.

Since no two petitions presented to the Tribunal are the same, it is impossible to predict the length of time this process will take. The average length of time is eight months, if we have complete cooperation from all involved.

from

THE DIOCESE OF ST. PETERSBURG OFFICE OF THE MARRIAGE TRIBUNAL

..................................

-- Anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), February 28, 2001.


Sherri,

Without some details it is hard to answer with specifics. But based on what you posted. If he didn't ask for and receive permission to marry a non-Catholic and/or receive a dispensation to marry in the Methodist church. Then the validity of the marriage is questionable. It would need to be submitted to the Tribunal for examination before he could attempt marriage again.

-- Br. Rich SFO (repsfo@prodigy.net), February 28, 2001.


Jmj

Hello, Sherri.
I'm very sorry to read about the way you have been mistreated.

(In my answer, I will avoid using the word "annulment," because that word implies that the Church can make "null" something that has substance. The proper term is "Decree of Nullity," by which a Church court sometimes finds that there was only a "putative marriage" -- i.e, that there was no true Sacrament of Marriage, valid in God's eyes, celebrated on the day of a wedding.)

The situation you described is a little bit unclear, so I cannot give you a definitive answer without further information.
You wrote, "We were married in the Methodist church." That could mean any of three things:
(1) One person could take that to mean that your husband became a Methodist -- or at least formally and openly declared that he was no longer a Catholic. If that is what happened, then your marriage to him is presumed valid by the Catholic Church, and it would be necessary for him to go through the full "Decree of Nullity" process. (The Church tribunal might decide that your marriage to him was valid, meaning that he could not marry another woman in the Catholic Church until you die.)
(2) But another person, reading your statement ("We were married in the Methodist church") could take that to mean that your husband remained Catholic and got the required permission from his bishop to be married in a Methodist church building, with a Catholic clergyman present as a witness. If that is what happened, then your marriage to him is presumed valid by the Catholic Church, and it would be necessary for him to go through the full "Declaration of Nullity" process -- as in #1, above.
(3) Finally, a third person, reading your statement ("We were married in the Methodist church") could take that to mean that your husband considered himself as remaining Catholic, but (either intentionally or out of ignorance) he failed to get the required permission from his bishop to be married in a Methodist church building. If that is what happened, your "marriage" was definitely invalid due to "lack of canonical form." However, that does not mean that he is off the hook. I believe that the tribunal/nullity process must STILL be followed in this case -- though it will probably be handled very expeditiously. I am familiar with a similar case, which took much less time than a full nullity case. I believe that you should be offered an opportunity to present evidence. For example, your ex-husband may claim that he never stopped being a Catholic. But you may be able to show that such was not the case. Justice and truth must be served.

Please follow up if I have confused you.
God bless you in these trying times.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 28, 2001.


Excuse me, Anthony and Rich. When I started to write my answer, neither of yours had yet appeared. I didn't mean to step on your work or to be repetitive.
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jgecik@desc.dla.mil), February 28, 2001.

don't worry John, it happens all the time.

............................................

-- Anthony (fides_spes_et_caritas@hotmail.com), February 28, 2001.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ