Marriage question

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

I've been everywhere searching for an answer to a marriage question: If a non-practicing, baptized Catholic marries a non-baptized, non-religious person in a civil ceremony...and did not get a dispensation (nor desire to get one, or cared) to marry outside the Church...upon civil divorce of the two is an annulment necessary to remarry and was the marriage valid at all?

If upon subsequent remarriage of a baptized Catholic then practicing as a Protestant to a baptized Protestant is that marriage considered valid based upon the status of the first marriage?

Since I am party A (the baptized Catholic in the examples above), if an annulment is required for either or both cases above, and I am seeking reentry to the Church...AND an annulment is hypothetically not granted (if needed)...how does a person avoid mortal sin, or even be granted forgiveness for sin, if he cannot receive any sacraments? How can the Church then hold him accountable for trying to make things right, and yet being unable to? Should I not just make more better use of my time in a Protestant church?

-- jim quardel (jimtech12345@yahoo.com), August 28, 2002

Answers

Hello, Jim.
Your situation, if I understand it correctly, is not really uncommoon or complex. I can answer the first part without hesitation, but I will have to ask for a clarification on the first part.

First you talked about your attempt to marry an unbaptized woman outside the Church. You wonder if, "upon civil divorce of the two, is an annulment necessary to remarry and was the marriage valid at all?"

The following, I believe, is a reliable principle:
"Any time a person has gone through any kind of wedding ceremony (Christian or non-Christian, whether according to Catholic canonical form or not) with a person who is still alive, those two people cannot attempt marriage to anyone else without first obtaining a Decree of Nullity, issued by a bishop after the work of a marriage tribunal."

That answers the first question (Decree of Nullity required? = Yes). The second? I am not capable of stating definitively if "the marriage was valid at all," but it appears not. Your status as a Catholic or non-Catholic at the time of the wedding is a crucial matter. If you were truly just "non-practicing" (i.e., still Catholic, but inactive), then you were not really married, in God's eyes -- but the tribunal (not yours truly) must declare that. But if, before the wedding to the non-Christian, you formally declared yourself no longer to be a Catholic, then it is possible that you entered into a valid marriage -- because then you would no longer have been under the jurisdiction of the Catholic bishop.

Before turning to your "second marriage," I want to say, "Welcome back" to the Catholic Church. You need not (and should not) delay your re-entry because of any marriage-related difficulty. Even if should be true that you cannot receive sacraments (temporarily), you are infinitely better off returning to the Church that you know Jesus founded. You would not be "mak[ing] better use of [your] time in a" non-Catholic situation. Only in Catholicism will you hear, day after day, week after week, "the truth and nothing but the truth." Only in Catholicism (and Eastern Orthodoxy) can you attend a genuine Eucharistic Liturgy, in which the Body and Blood of Jesus become truly present. Being away from those things (and other things that are distinctively Catholic) is surely not "mak[ing] better use of [your] time."

Now, you say that you became a Protestant and then got "re-married" to a Protestant woman. One thing that you have not told us is if you are still married or now divorced. If you could please come back to this thread (http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=009uvS) and say a bit about that, I would be able to tell you more. (I'd rather not speak in hypotheticals and conditional terms.)

By the way, if you are now divorced for a second time, two things are true: (1) If you do not intend to marry as a Catholic, you need never even seek a Decree of Nullity ... and (2) you may receive the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Eucharist without any delay at all.

Looking forward to your next message, Jim.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), August 28, 2002.


Thanks bunch for your response. To clairify, I married at the age of 19 under the weight of a pregnancy. But prior to that, by age 15, I had ceased all Catholic activities, even though I was going to Catholic high school (no Mass, communion, confession). That action was more out of desire to distance myself from God, and the obvious way was the Church. By the time I married I had no affiliation with God, much less the Church. I wouldn't have known to seek a dispensation to marry outside the Church, nor would I have wanted to - - it would have offended my disgust with God at the time. The marriage was a JP, and as I said the young lady was non-baptized, non- religious. One point I can mention is that in retrospect my level of immaturity was profound at the time, and yes, the marriage would never have occurred were it not for the pregnancy. But that's not the issue. One further point is that when I contacted that first wife to raise the possibility of her being contacted by who knows who for annulment purposes...she responded in typical heated hostility. If an annulment is necessary, that part would not be fun, in fact, she likely would refuse any participation. Second, I remarried at 28 to a good Protestant girl a few years after "getting saved" in the Jesus Movement of the 70's. We have continued on to this day happily married, and up until around two years ago, were pretty regular evangelical church-goers. She has accepted my inquiries into the Church in stride, and has no intention of converting. I might mention I've left out a non-essential, but important point in all this. I actually had "thought" I returned to the Church 2 years ago, confession--communion and the whole kaboodle. But one day a Catholic marriage seminar put a stop to all that when they started talking about marriage/remarriage. I was shocked and stunned, and actually stopped going to Mass at all (five months now). Yes, I have felt God abandoned me, and even misled me in "bringing" me back to the Church was not done with good advice. I have felt disgusted with God much of my life, and this is really been a reinforcing event in that I had believed "the return" was a culmination of my spiritual life. The reasons I now re-inquire are only three: I believe the Church is what it claims to be, the Mass is the fullest expression of Christian worship, and I don't want to be cast into the lake of fire. But at this point it's really an attitude of whatever on my side, I can honestly say I thought I returned to the Church with true repentance and desire for God. So, from here on it's a whatever happens attitude. I know I tried. But I'll give the Church one more chance. I have learned in my "return", non-return period that the Church has some real problems in how it relates to people...you're really on your own. In recent light of what my experience has done to me, I know my current wife would be quite resistant to a "blessing of our marriage" ...her anger at the Church is quite pronounced after all I've mentioned. Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

-- jim (jimtech12345@yahoo.com), August 29, 2002.

Jim,

Welcom back home! The best advice any of us (non-priests) can give to you is to talk to your pastor (the Priest in charge of the church you now attend). I believe, since it seems that your first marriage wasn't valid (once again this is only opinion), and this marriage (the second one) seems good, you could simply ask for a dispensation (wich would include annulment of the first marriage, and confirmation of the validity of this one).

As far as your concern for your wife: Follow God and Love Him and His Catholic Church, and your wife WILL follow! For inspiration I would suggest reading the Scott and Kimberly Hahn conversion stories. Scott was a protestant who converted to Catholocism before his wife converted. Anyway, I think it is worth it.

But once again, your best bet is to talk to your pastor.

In Christ.

-- Jake Huether (jake.huether@lamrc.com), August 29, 2002.


Jmj

Hello, Jim.
I'd like to repeat a paragraph from my reply to you yesterday:

"That answers the first question (Decree of Nullity required? = Yes). The second question? I am not capable of stating definitively if 'the marriage was valid at all,' but it appears not. Your status as a Catholic or non-Catholic at the time of the wedding is a crucial matter. If you were truly just 'non-practicing' (i.e., still Catholic, but inactive), then you were not really married, in God's eyes -- but the tribunal (not yours truly) must declare that as a fact. If, though, before the wedding to the non-Christian, you formally declared yourself no longer to be a Catholic, then it is possible that you entered into a valid marriage -- because then you would no longer have been under the jurisdiction of the Catholic bishop."

I was hoping, Jim, that you would make very clear whether you were still a Catholic, but inactive -- or if you had formally broken from the Church -- at the time of the first wedding. Your reply is still not fully clear, but you seem to have been almost anti-Catholic, even anti-God. ["I had no affiliation with God, much less the Church."] For the sake of carrying on this conversation, I am going to have to conclude that you had really formally left the Church and no longer would have said, "I am a Catholic," if someone had asked your religion.

Because of this tentative conclusion I am drawing, it follows that your marriage at age 19 may have been valid. Only the tribunal can decide, though, having read any testimony that is offered. You were not obliged to contact your "ex-wife," and she is likewise not obliged to co-operate in the proceedings. The tribunal can do its work without her testimony, though it would prefer to see what she has to say.

Now, let us assume that the tribunal determines that you were validly married at age 19. (My gut feeling is that this is unlikely to happen, but I have to walk you through that scenario.) If your marriage at age 19 is deemed to have been valid, it follows that you were not free to marry a second time. Consequently, your present union would be invalid. Even so, you would be welcome to return to the Catholic Church, which Jesus founded ("the Church [that] is what it claims to be," you wrote), while being unable to partake of the Sacraments at least temporarily.

Now, let us assume instead that the tribunal determines that you were not validly married at age 19 -- quite a strong possibility, though not a certainty. A Decree of Nullity would then be issued, and you would immediately be able to seek the "retroactive validation" of the marriage you celebrated as a Protestant. The Church would bless your union, and you would be free to partake of the Sacraments.

Jim, I hope that you can see that, though the process will not be easy on you, it is not nearly as complex as you may have been led to believe.

In exchange for my being willing to share this information with you, I would like to ask a favor of you. Please do not think or say, as you did in your last message, that you are "giv[ing] the Church one more chance." The "Church" -- our Mother and Teacher -- never lets us down, and she never needs "one more chance" from us. Rather, sometimes we let ourselves (or God) down, or sometimes a fellow Catholic lets us down. But neither we nor our fellow Catholic is "the Church." It is we sinners who need "one more chance," not the Church.

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), August 29, 2002.


Thanks for the answers to my marriage questions fellas, they've helped me focus a bit. But the next, most obvious question would be: How does a person who cannot receive the sacraments receive forgive- ness for sins, mortal or not? To note, I haven't been to Mass in six months now...more a reaction to the sense of being let down by God upon finding out about not being able to receive the sacraments anymore. Lately I've been feeling the pull to return...but until then this issue seems insoluable...any clear answers on this one? Thanks again.

-- Jim (jimtech12345@yahoo.com), September 08, 2002.


Hello, Jim.

First, I must say that I hope you are asking the Church to determine whether a Decree of Nullity can be issued, leaving you free to have your marriage blessed. If that can happen, you will be able to receive the Sacraments.

But I know that you are considered about the "here and now." You asked, "How [can I] receive forgiveness for sins, mortal or not?" In order to give you a truthful answer, I will have a duty to tell you two things that might come as a shock ... so please brace yourself!

(1) If you choose to remain in an active sexual relationship with the woman you now love, then it is unavoidable to refer to this as adultery (at least objectively speaking). The problem is that adultery is a mortal sin, and, in order to be forgiven when he confesses a mortal sin, a guy has to have a firm intention not to commit that sin again. If he makes a sacramental confession (or confess directly to God), saying that he is sorry for adultery, while knowing all along that he intends to commit the same sin (maybe even the same day), then the confession is not an honest and valid one and the sin is not forgiven.

(2) There is a way for you to begin receiving the Sacraments immediately -- even before the Church has made a decision on the nullity proceeding. However, it would require a radical sacrifice on the part of you and the woman you love. You would have to (at least temporarily) give up your sexual relationship, promising to live a chaste and "continent" life instead -- until you are free to marry. This would mean a separation in living quarters -- ideally staying in separate homes, but at least in separate bedrooms. As odd as this may sound upon first reading, you should know that many people are making this sacrifice -- out of love for God and concern for the purity of their souls.

Please sleep on it (at least one night -- preferably a lot more) and pray very hard about this before you decide. The best place to pray is in church before the Blessed Sacrament. Ask Jesus to help you. And we can talk about it here some more, if you wish.

God bless you.
John
PS:

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 08, 2002.


Ouch! Forgot to proofread. First sentence of paragraph 2 should be:
But I know that you are concerned about the "here and now."

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 08, 2002.

Whew! Now that's a radical answer. The issue is is that I've been married for 23 years to this same woman..very happily. Now I've got the feeling that the next response is that you suggest I'm not even married presently, or have not been for all these years. Only as a follow up note, the first marriage at 19 I've always considered non- existent. But, I think I can now predict your answer to that one too. My answer is that no, I will not seperate myself from my wife, ever. If that is somehow "continuing in sin", I think our respective responses back and forth won't get very far. As far as you doing your duty, John, in relating Church teaching on the subject...it's taken and considered. To be very frank, my attempt at returning to the Church has really opened my eyes up to unobjective, implacable attitudes. I'm not referring to any teaching per se, but of an under- lying "our way or the highway" worldview from Catholic apologists. And the cat you always pull out of your hat in the end, after answer and reply, is the perennial "see...you schismatic! you're rejecting the Church...so...so yer going to hell! What I don't get is how CAtholics can call Protestants "our seperated brothers and sisters", and at the same reconcile your corporate statements of the exclusivity of the Church, not to mention the injunctions to follow every jot and tittle. My point is that many responses I see in forums like these have the ominous air of "take it or leave it" from the Catholic writer. It doesn't help the serious inquirer. Now, if the writer's attitude is "well, we only expect to get the really good (compliant) seekers of the Church...the rest are weeded out...they weren't willing to go all the way anyway" ,...then I suppose those like me who read statements that don't ring true....that don't feel like they're from God are going to move on. No, John, it's not that your answer sounds ludicrous...it's that it doesn't ring true. My instinct suggests it can't be true. But let me guess here, you might respond something like "hey...I'm just tellin' ya what the Church teaches." Black and white. Now I'll stop right there and tell you I'm not Catholic bashing. But as time goes on I am getting very impatient with Catholic arrogance and haughtiness. One thing for sure, this entire attempt at returning to the Church is not what I anticipated at all. One thing you learn quickly as a Protestant (maybe the only thing) is that God is glad to have you back with him. This is the central theme in evangelicalism...you're welcome! You're forgiven! Glad to have you back, my son. It feels pretty good to a person to be wanted by God. I submit to you that if 20 plus years of faith, albeit Protestant, and 2 plus years as a wanna be Catholic are merely the wishful perception of a hopeful believer in God............then so can your faith experience be illusory, totally unreal. If sacraments are the only thing that seperate you from me, and the stamp of a diocese tribunal upon some nullifying papers are the only thing that makes me "OK" in the Church's eyes....then I suggest you and I are equally and potentially the same distance from the lake of fire. The difference is is that I know I'm hellbound. And after all this, if I actually get a nullification...and then a convalidation...do you really think I'm going to feel any different about God and the Church? You know the ugly metaphor...the one that says I'm being told it's raining on my leg, when I know it's something else? Why doesn't the Church just say..."hey, all you guys with divorces.. well, we're sorry, but you just don't fit in here. You might as well try that Methodist church over there; you'll do much better there. and besides, what you don't know won't hurt you." Don't believe for a minute that I don't know the Church doesn't change for the individual, the individual has to bend under the Church...I know that reality. At least until doctrine "develops" with regard to marriage/divorce; then maybe I can enjoy the Mass. I'm very logical, so here's the real reality: I don't want anyone contacting my first wife (Kujo), much less a Church tribubnal, Even if I got an annulment, my dear wife of 23 years would rip out the priests eyes if any suggestion was made that our marriage was invalid, Even if those two were done, I would want to then return to the Church, I cannot be forgiven for any sins until any of the above is accomplished. Okay, I get it now.



-- jim (jimtech12345@yahoo.com), September 08, 2002.


Jim writes:

"I'm not referring to any teaching per se, but of an under-lying "our way or the highway" worldview from Catholic apologists."

Jim, if you would read your own message to John, you might actually find that you yourself have the "my way or the highway" view of religion. If the religion doesn't submit to every demand you place on it, is that the fault of the religion?

In my view, there's not much spiritual fulfillment in a religion that panders to every whim I have.

Later, you write:

"Don't believe for a minute that I don't know the Church doesn't change for the individual, the individual has to bend under the Church...I know that reality."

I think that your post reflects the attitude of someone who wants the Church to change for you. Just my opinion...

You write:

"This is the central theme in evangelicalism...you're welcome! You're forgiven! Glad to have you back, my son. It feels pretty good to a person to be wanted by God."

This may be the central theme of evangelicalism; but your interpretation may be contrary to scripture. Despite the fact that God loves everyone with an infinite love, and forgives us when we ask, do evangelicals expect God to forgive us when we are not repentant? I don't think so. If evangelicalism's message is "you're forgiven!", then the Catholic Christian message is, "If you repent and amend your life to conform to the will of God, you are forgiven!"

The Gospel reading from yesterday has Jesus saying some pretty harsh words to those who will not listen to brotherly correction. Here's part of the Gospel reading:

Mt 18:15-17:

Jesus said to his disciples: "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.

If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.'

If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.

This is the advice of Jesus Christ. Well, you can reject Jesus, because the temporal authorities don't mandate belief in Jesus. I suppose you could even invent some kind of psuedo-Jesus who doesn't even condemn sin.

The civil authorities do defend part of Judeo-Christian morality. Murder and stealing is a civil offense. Polygamy is a civil offense, even though an individual can divorce and remarry (at least in the USA).

Jim, I hope you would entertain a question from me. I know that your own situation doesn't apply here, but I'd like to go into the hypothetical. The civil authorities in my state require six months or a year to pass before granting a divorce. Do you think that the government is overstepping its bounds? Shouldn't we have the freedom to divorce and remarry at will? I could marry the same day that I make the decision; but I have to wait for 6-12 months before getting a civil divorce? Just as you reject the Church's ability to "bind and loose" in spiritual matters, do you also reject the civil authority's "my way or the highway" stance with regard to divorce waiting periods?

Jim writes:

"At least until doctrine "develops" with regard to marriage/divorce; then maybe I can enjoy the Mass."

Though Protestant doctrine may "develop" for you, Catholic doctrine does not. I don't understand why "Biblical" Protestants can so readily accept the practice of divorce and re-marriage, even when Jesus speaks so clearly against it.

In Christ,

Mateo.

PS--for a new paragraph, just hit "enter" twice. That way, your posts will be more readable.

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), September 09, 2002.


Wonderful to read your message, Mateo! I missed you during your long time away -- but what a well-earned and special time away! Congratulations on your marriage! I hope that you had a beautiful honeymoon.


Jim, I ended my last message by writing: "Please sleep on it (at least one night -- preferably a lot more) and pray very hard about this before you decide. The best place to pray is in church before the Blessed Sacrament. Ask Jesus to help you."

Based on the date of my message and your emotionally negative reply (both 09/08), I'm sad to see that you did not take my advice. You definitely did not "sleep on it" (since your post is not dated 09/09), and I find it hard to believe that you prayed about it in church before responding. This is bothering you a lot and making you very angry. That is not helpful.

Would you like me to respond to your message? I would have some things to say on topics not raised by Mateo. (For example, we never condemn people to hell here, though you accused us of that practice. For another example, Pope John Paul II has spoken very compassionately to people in your situation.)

God bless you.
John

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 09, 2002.



"If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a... tax collector."

Hmmm.

HMMMMMMMM.

Heretic, tax collector; heretic, tax collector. It's starting to sink in. lol!

W/B Mateo.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), September 10, 2002.


One thing I've learned in all this is that certitude means nothing. In the end we all face Jesus, and to each of us He may say either "welcome, thou good and faithful servant...", or "...depart from Me, I never knew you." I've spent much of my life thinking I had a handle on God's requirements for my life, and in the end what I perceived about myself meant little or nothing. You people sit there pulling out all the pat answers from a hat, and in the final analysis what you think you have rendered to be true about someone else means nothing. He is the final judge. My intent is to indeed speak to the parish priest, but surely not at the prompting of clownish rattling; it will be out of objective motivation that none of us has the truth and that it may be revealed by another source. I've never discounted the authority and tradition of the Church, only the cultural discompassion of many adherents. You may repeat the words of the Lord, but until you've walked a mile in the shoes of another...you really know nothing. "Rightful Authority is not license for Authoritarianism..."

-- jim (jimtech12345@yahoo.com), September 11, 2002.

Jim,

You seem pretty upset and confused. I hope that you will allow God to pull you out of your despair.

God bless you,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), September 11, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ