Hello,

I am a Catholic wanting to marry my girlfriend whom I love very much. My girlfriend is a non-catholic and unfortunately she has been married before. She is divorced. I have made some enquiries and I'm hearing some crazy responses. I've been told that she has to get an annullment as according to the catholic church, she is still regarded as being married. The thought of not being married in a catholic church is tearing my family apart, and we can't go ahead with the annulment due to not wanting to get in contact with her ex. They are also saying that if I get married in her church (Uniting Church) that I will never be able to have communion in my church again. How is this possible? Can anybody tell me if this is true and if there is something else that can be done? The whole thing just sound ridiculous.

Thank you.

-- Steve Pirrottina (spirrottina@hotmail.com), July 02, 2003

Answers

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Dear Steve,

Yes, since the woman you hope to marry has been married before, it is essential that you take the necessary steps to determine whether or not she is still married before marrying her yourself. To fail to do so would render your own marriage to her invalid, if in fact her previous marriage is still valid. You would not have to directly contact her husband in order to pursue an annulment. The marriage tribunal would do that. In any case, it needs to be done. It is true that your entering into an invalid or questionable marriage would prevent your reception of Holy Communion. A person must be in a state of grace to receive Communion, that is, free of serious sin, and an ongoing situation of invalid "marriage" is an ongoing state of serious sin. Therefore if you entered into such a marital relationship, you would be unable to receive Communion until such time as your marriage was validated. Of course, in the event that her former marriage is valid, your marriage to her could be validated only upon the death of her husband, which is why is is so important to find out the facts before proceding.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Steve, Talk to your local priest.

Your girlfriend's marriage may, indeed, be valid, but it may not.

Because she is a non-catholic, her marriage may be defective by form, meaning that the conditions under which the vows were made were defective.

Your priest can and will help you. Most priests are very familiar with canon law in these matters.

Each diocese is a little different in the technical process of how a marriage tribunal reviews a case. The Church is working very hard in standardizing the process, but there still may be little processing differences from diocese to diocese.

If the marriage is defective by form, the process of review by a tribunal may be very short. In our diocese, a parish priest may, if he wants( with the approval of the Bishop), write a request for a summary finding by a tribunal. Of course, this is done only if the defective form is evident.

Talk to your priest. If he can't answer your questions, he may refer you to the tribunal office or to another priest. My personal advise is to ask your priest first if he handles petiions on a regular basis, then get into details with him, if he does.

Email me direct if you have any specific questions, that you may not want on a public forum and I'll try to help.

God Bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

I would suggest you marry a Catholic.

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Fish or cut bait Steve. Get the annulment, they are a dime a dozen. If your girl won't face her husband, why would you date her in the first place? You have no business dating a married woman anyway its called adultery. Remember the commandments? Those ten incidentals. At least two are involved here. Adultery and coveting your neighbors wife. Sorry you are only batting .200 but there is always room for improvement. Sounds like you are lying to yourself, which brings you to .333. That could make you an all-star.

Common sense Steve.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Jmj

Hello, Paul.
I agree with your good advice to Steve. However you made one "slip" -- which may have just been an accidental choice of words -- and I wanted to clarify it. You wrote: "... it is essential that you take the necessary steps to determine whether or not she is still married before marrying her yourself. To fail to do so would render your own marriage to her invalid, if in fact her previous marriage is still valid."

I put your word "if" in bold type as a prelude to saying that "fail[ing] to do so would render [Steve's attempted] marriage ... invalid, [regardless of whether or not] her previous marriage is ... valid."

Sorry if I made that confusing. My point is that, if there is no declaration of nullity sought and received, Steve would not be able to marry in the Catholic Church. Then his attempt to marry outside the Church would be invalid [contrary to canonical form] -- no matter what the truth may be about his friend's previous "union." That is why it it was not correct to use the word "if."

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Steve: Thirty six years ago my older sister married a divorced man and left the Roman Catholic church. Our family mourned her decision but did not abandon her. Her husband died recently and I feel free to tell you that they lived a good life together. They each contributed a great deal to their community. My own son is now dating a woman who was married in the Luthern church and is now divorced. They seem absolutely ideal for one another. Her parents are as active in the Luthern church as I am in my own parish. I do not know they decision they will make but I am hoping they will marry and spend their life together. My younger sister was married recently for the first time in her nearly sixty years of life. She is a Eucharistic minister in a very prestigious New York City parish. Her husband, a Catholic, had been married three times before. His first marriage, some 40 years ago, ended in divorce. The Church annuled his first marriage and they married in the Church. My point is simply to follow your heart and your conscience and pray for guidance. All else will fall in place.

-- Resse Archer (researcher200360@yahoo.com), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

"My point is simply to follow your heart and your conscience and pray for guidance."

Bad Point.

Suggest you follow the God, Church & the Catechism instead. The GUIDANCE is clear - only the misguided are unclear and provide bad points of advice...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), July 02, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

As John Neuman said "...my conscience first, then the Pope" meaning, of course, that one must first respond to one's (developed) conscience before one responds to man made rules - inspired though they may be. Bad point to pray for guidance? I don't think so.

-- Resse Archer (researcher200360@yahoo.com), July 03, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Reese,

You are wrong and you even state a developed conscience.

A conscience correctly instructed does not stray from the teaching of the Church.

You fool only yourself and those who follow your errant advice but I bet you will not accept the responsibility for the errors which will come in the wake of your advice, will you. Before God I mean. But he will hold you responsible even if you won't accept it. He is BOTH merciful and just.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), July 03, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

"As John Neuman said "...my conscience first, then the Pope" meaning, of course, that one must first respond to one's (developed) conscience before one responds to man made rules - inspired though they may be. Bad point to pray for guidance? I don't think so."

Well I know so -no 'thinking about it' -suggest you check your '(developed) conscience' and self discerned realities against that which is clearly available guidance from the Church... WHEN there is conflict/disagreement -God, Church & Catechism resoundingly trump '(developed) conscience' and or self discerned 'guidance'...

One must check -it is that simple. IF you choose not to THEN why?

Purposely sticking one's head in the quicksand of delusion is bad enough; suggesting the delusion is divinely inspired is lunacy...

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), July 03, 2003.

Response to Marriage in the catholic with someone having been married before

Jmj

Hello, Resse.
I'm sorry to see that your position is one that a Catholic must never take.

You wrote: "Our family mourned [my sister's] decision [to marry a divorced man and leave the Catholic Church] but did not abandon her. Her husband died recently and I feel free to tell you that they lived a good life together."

Resse, what your family originally did was right and proper -- they "mourned" ... "but did not abandon her."
However, as the decades passed, your good "resolve" weakened and you gave in to satan's temptation to believe that "they lived a good life together." Like hell they did! They were (objectively speaking) committing thousands of mortal sins of adultery, and she fell away from the true Church, another (objective) mortal sin. If the poor man (who was not "her husband") was saved at his death, it was only by a miracle.

Come on, man! Snap out of it. Remember the Ten Commandments and take them seriously, because they are from God and they repeat what was written on your heart by God. Adultery is ruled out!

Resse, you are misusing words from Venerable John Henry Cardinal Newman [not "Neuman"]. Did you ever stop to think that, if he was a pushing freedom of conscience to dissent from the pope, he would never have been named as a "cardinal" and would not be called "Venerable" today? Cardinal Newman was merely applying the principle that we must follow our conscience (fully formed according to the Commandments) rather than blindly obey a superior who is clearly commanding us to sin. The truth is that no pope ever commanded Newman -- or you, or your sister -- to sin. That is why your comment quoting Newman is irrelevant. To know more about Newman and what he really believed (to the shock of dissenters), please read the following ...

----------- QUOTE [Q&A from moral theologian and Yonkers seminary professor, Monsignor William B. Smith, in "Homilectic and Pastoral Review" (2001)] -------------
Question: I sometimes read the remark attributed to Cardinal Newman: “I shall drink, —- to the Pope, if you please -— still, to Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards.” Is this accurate?

Answer: It is true that Newman wrote that. It is the final sentence of his famous “Letter to the Duke of Norfolk.” In full it reads: “Certainly, if I am obliged to bring religion into after-dinner toasts, (which indeed does not seem quite the thing) I shall drink, — to the Pope, if you please, — still, to Conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards.” (J. H. Newman, Certain Difficulties Felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching [London: Basil Montagu Pickering, 1876] p. 261).

Some seem to give more attention to this final sentence than to the entire effort. Again, some try to convert this -— in what may well be the most profound discussion of obedience and sovereignty in the English language —- into making Newman some kind of modern dissenter. Nothing could be further from the truth. Almost all of Newman’s adult intellectual effort was to refute autonomous individualism in religion.

Indeed, in Newman’s famous Letter to the Duke of Norfolk, the learned Cardinal was truly prescient in repudiating in the 19th Century a favorite distortion of conscience that began to reign in the 20th Century and into this one.

Newman wrote: “The [proper] view of conscience, I know, is very different from that ordinarily taken of it, ... It is founded on the doctrine that conscience is the voice of God, whereas it is fashionable on all hands now to consider it one way or another a creation of man” (p. 247).

“Conscience is not a long-sighted selfishness, nor a desire to be consistent with oneself; but it is a messenger from Him, Who, both in nature and grace, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by His representatives” (p. 248).

“Conscience has rights because it has duties; but in this age, with a large portion of the public, it is the very right and freedom of conscience, to ignore a Lawgiver and Judge, to be independent of unseen obligations. It becomes a license to take up any or no religion, to take up this or that and let it go again, to go to church, to go to chapel, to boast of being above all religions and to be an impartial critic of each of them. Conscience is a stern monitor, but in this century it has been superseded by a counterfeit, which the eighteen centuries prior to it never heard of, and could not have mistaken for it, if they had. It is the right of self will” (p. 250).

What Cardinal Newman utterly rejected in 1876 — the spurious “right” of self will: the autonomy, even infallibility, of my own self judgment -— is precisely what so many dissenters have embraced as their very birthright and self-validation. No, Cardinal Newman was neither a modern nor even a modest dissenter.
--------------------- END QUOTE --------------

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), July 03, 2003.

Dear Steve,

Please don't listen to the nonsense I just read about adultery and obeying the Church. The Catholic Church should exist for YOU and YOU for IT - not just you for it! It's not a one way street.

I am a Catholic and I currently have the same problem as you. My fiancee was previously married in a civil ceramony (no minister)in the Phillipines. She has been granted a legal divorce here in Canada. Now my Parish Priest told us that she needs an annulment. But Steve I can't figure out why?

I understand that The Catholic Church recognizes all non Catholic marriages outside the Church (fine they are obeying civil the authorites). But those same Civil authorities have also granted a civil (legal) divorce, so if the Church recognizes a non Chatholic marriage by virture of the fact that it must obey the Civil authorities; then it is only logical that they obey them with regards to a civil divorce also. (In fact Steve, the Church can't and won't even grant an annulment whith out a legal divorce!) So why then does the Catholic church still need an annulment? I can't figure that out. It makes no logical sense. It almost seens Steve, that non Catholics have more rights then Chatholics themselves! You've never been married, I've never been married!

I don't know if your girlfriend was married in a christian ceremony before God but mine wasn't - therefore spiritually speaking I don't beleive my fiancee's marriage is spiritually valid. That is what the tribunal will try to deternine anyway - was the marriage valid (and there can be lots of reasons why it might not be). In my case I know that the tribunal would eventually decide in our favor anyway (even my Parish priest said so) and grant an annulment - so why wait a year and a half - and yes Steve it will take at least that long for them to grant your annulment if you so choose that route - and it's not free either.

Steve I have a feeling that it your girlfriend dosen't want her Ex notified it's fore a good reason (and I suspect abuse) but only she knows. I'd talk to her. I would be more concerned about what kind of Christian Church your girlfriends church is. If they are not a fanatical evangelical protastant church you might be ok - but I doubt it. Anglicans are pretty close to Catholicism - you might try there for an alternative solution to your problem. At least you can still receive the Sacraments - Anglicans just can't count that's all!

Steve I've taken the time to write this to you because I feel for you; after all I have the same problem. In my case we've chosen to marry outside the Church, but before God, in a simple christian ceremony (Baptist Federation). I'm still a Chatholic (unless the Ex- communicate me) but what the future will bring only God knows. We haven't decided if we will stay in the Catholic Church. We want too but it just might me too much hoopla...

...any way feel free to E-mail me if you want to talk further.

Chiao Steve... - Dante...

-- Dante Antonio Prudente (Dante1@sympatico.ca), July 13, 2003.

"Now my Parish Priest told us that she needs an annulment. But Steve I can't figure out why?"

A: To provide YOU with assurance that the person you are marrying is not already married to someone else. Apparently the Church is more concerned with your spiritual welfare and the quality of your impending marriage than you are.

"if the Church recognizes a non Catholic marriage by virture of the fact that it must obey the Civil authorities; then it is only logical that they obey them with regards to a civil divorce also"

A: Well here is the incorrect assumption that is causing your confusion. The Church does NOT recognize non-Catholic marriages "by virtue of the fact that it must obey the Civil authorities". Civil authorities cannot require the Church to recognize anything that is contrary to the law of God, and the Church owes no obedience to civil authorities on spiritual/moral matters. The Church tentively "recognizes" non-Catholic marriages NOT because of the the involvement of civil decrees, but because of the possibility that some of those marriages do in fact meet the requirements for a valid marriage before God, conmpletely apart from any civil considerations.

"In fact Steve, the Church can't and won't even grant an annulment whith out a legal divorce!"

A: Yes, here the Church makes a concession to civil authority, not because it is bound to do so, and not becauase it recognizes the action of the state as having any bearing on actual validity of a marriage, but simply to avoid unnecessary constant confrontations with the state. Since divorce has no effect whatsoever on a valid Christian marriage, and since the state requires legal dissolution of the civil marriage contract, the Church requires couples to meet the requirements of the state before it will address the question of actual validity before God. "Give unto Ceasar that which is Caesar's, and to God that which is God's. (Matt 22:21)

"therefore spiritually speaking I don't beleive my fiancee's marriage is spiritually valid"

A: And you are willing to base the most important decision of your life on nothing more than your personal feelings on the matter, without determining the facts?? I wonder if you would approach major surgery, or a major financial investment with such an attitude of uninformed assumption? I would want to KNOW the facts before making such a move, not just act on what I "believe", especially if I were not personally a medical, or financial, or marital expert.

"so why wait a year and a half - and yes Steve it will take at least that long for them to grant your annulment if you so choose that route - and it's not free either"

A: If your case is as clearcut as you imply, a finding of nullity would probably take no more than a few months. If the case takes longer to resolve, that is a strong indication of how necessary such action really was. Obviously it is not "free". There is a lot of work involved. Surgery is not free either - just necessary.

"In my case we've chosen to marry outside the Church, but before God, in a simple christian ceremony (Baptist Federation)"

A: How does one marry "before God" while violating His will? God has given you a Church - one Church only - through which you can know His law and His will. To reject the teaching of His Church and seek "alternative solutions" [sanitized version of "reject the truth and seek whatever will coincide with your personal desires"] is not the way to enter into a marriage "before God". Or are you planning for failure, setting up your marriage in a way that will ensure grounds for future annulment?

"We haven't decided if we will stay in the Catholic Church. We want too but it just might me too much hoopla..."

A: It sounds like too much truth is the real problem. People who don't want to live in the truth will always experience difficulties living in the Catholic Church, where the fullness of God's truth is the ever-present guiding light. Some would rather avoid the brilliance of that light, living instead among the shadows of manmade tradition, partial truth, and personal desire. God allows you that choice. We each have free will. And we are each responsible before God for the decisions of free will we make.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 13, 2003.

Outstanding response, Paul!

Dante, I will pray that you come back to this thread and see it, because you need these facts and this advice (from a deacon) so badly.

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), July 13, 2003.

Dante,

Thank you for such a supportive response. Finally someone that has said something positive about the whole thing. I agree with you that the whole thing is ridiculous. No one on this forum seems to understand that there are two people that are in love with each other and just want to be together. We could spend all of our lives doing what someone else has told us to do, and die thinking, gees, if only we did what we wanted to do, we may have got a lot more out of life! Instead of some others who go by these crazy rules without thinking for a second what makes them happy. And you're right, God only knows the future we will have. I will remain a Catholic despite this, and I believe God will always be with us and keep us safe. I know he can see how happy we are together, and that's what is important. I believe this is not about God, but about a group of people who have made up some ridiculous rule to punish those who have unfortunately experienced some bad luck in their lives. They've suffered enough from divorce. A bit of support from the Catholic church wouldn't be too much to ask you wouldn't think.

My fiance' never suffered any abuse, but her ex-husband cheated on her. And her and her family don't want to have anything to do with him. If they proceed with the annulment, he will find out all their details (ie. address, phone numbers, etc). They do not want him to know anything about them anymore. Logical reasoning I think!

Dante, good luck with your future. My fiance' and I are getting married in her church (Uniting Church). They are not fanatical about all this, and are very accepting and willing to marry us. At least they can see when two people are happy and want to be together.

Good Luck Dante and thank you for your support.

Steve

-- Steve (spirrottina@hotmail.com), July 13, 2003.

That's for sure!. Manmade so-called "churches" are anything but fanatical about the truth. Unfortunately, it is truth that sets us free, and untruth that holds us in spiritual bondange. If allowing you to walk into a life of earthly bondage is your idea of "support", then that's your choice.

You say, "We could spend all of our lives doing what someone else has told us to do, and die thinking, gees, if only we did what we wanted to do, we may have got a lot more out of life!"

A: Yes. Or we could spend all our lives ignoring what God has told us to do, and die thinking, gee, if only we had lived as God wanted us to live for those few years, we may have gotten a lot more out of eternity.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 13, 2003.

Paul,

You don't know! Nobody knows! We all have a beliefs about God but nobody knows for sure what the truth is. Every Religion is different and has different beliefs, and they all feel they are right. So who do you believe? You have to go with your own instinct. And my instinct tells me that I'm doing what is right and God can see that. Open up to the real world!!!

-- Steve (spirrottina@hotmail.com), July 13, 2003.

Dear Steve,

In fact, I do know! Why bother with religion at all if doing so doesn't make it possible to identify the truth? Of course every religion has different beliefs! Of course every religion thinks it is right! But any rational person can take a look at the overall situation and immediately know that they cannot be right, since real truth cannot conflict with real truth, and every religion conflicts with every other. Therefore, two possibilities exist - either no religion has the truth, in which case why bother with any of them?; or, one religion has the truth and the rest do not, in which case it is critical to identify that one true Church. It is not sufficient to say that every religion has part of the truth. That simply means that every religion has a mix of truth and untruth, in which case no-one has any way of knowing whether a particular belief is actually true or not, in which case why bother? If "instinct" was a reliable guide, again, why bother with religion? But, if God exists, and if truth does matter, then the only reasonable expectation is that God must have revealed the truth to someone. And, given that God sent His Son to earth to establish a Church, it's a pretty sound bet that the One Church He founded is the One to which God revealed the truth, especially since He personally told that Church "the Holy Spirit will guide you to ALL TRUTH". History clearly reveals the identity of that one Church established by Jesus Christ for all men as the Holy Catholic Church. Therefore Steve, I do in fact know the truth with certainty, because I am a member of that very Church, which the Word of God describes as "the pillar and foundation of truth".

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), July 13, 2003.

Paul,

You tell me what I'm supposed to do? I love this person and I don't want anything to stand in the way of being with her. So you tell me what I'm supposed to do? And no, annullment is not an option!

-- Steve (spirrottina@hotmail.com), July 13, 2003.

Steve,

I believe you have two main arguments against proceeding with the annulment process.

1. The time it will take to obtain one. 2. You do not want her (hopefully) ex-spouse to have any contact with her. I say hopefully since you are not sure if she is still married.

The first problem is really moot. Would you rather spend 6-18 months of your life on earth doing the correct thing if that will assist you in spending ETERNITY with God? Or risk Eternity with God in order to do what you want NOW?

For the second point, your girlfriend will NOT have to have any contact with her hopefully ex-husband. The Catholic Church will be the one to contact him. Her current phone number and address will NOT be given to him. Talk to your local pastor about this to be reassured.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), July 14, 2003.

You can delete this one too:

How can you judge if a person is committing an imortal sin? You are trying to justify the reasons why someone should not marry outside the church because he or she will be condemned to the fire of hell. So everyone else who is not catholic, who get married in other religions are sinners?

-- niz (nizul@hotmail.com), July 17, 2003.