My wife and I had a civil Marriage but like to marry in catholic church. I was married previousaly and then devorced .The church did grant an annulment on grounds of :Grave lack of discretion on both parties.My wife was married by justice of peace to her ex-spouse then devorced ,they are both catholic. my question is, does my wife need an annulment,even though the marriage was civil.

-- Robert Long (Robert _1223@msn.com), November 20, 2004

Answers

Yes. Any previous marriage requires annulment. The circumstances you described essentially guarantee that she will be granted one, and the process will likely be fairly quick, but the marriage still has to be submitted to the tribunal. We cannot simply assume the invalidity of a prior marriage on our own, even when circumstances appear clearcut.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 20, 2004.

Paul is right.

But let me add: Many dioceses have tribunals that allow a parish priest to document marriages that are obviously defective and submit their finding to the tribunal. This leaves the tribunal working on more complicated cases and de facto speeds the process for obviously defective cases. Contact your priest, he will help.

I have been through the process of seeking a declaration of nullity. Mine went through the diocese and archdiocese. In my case it was ardous but well worth it.

Good luck and God bless,

-- john placette (jplacette@catholic.org), November 20, 2004.

Actually Paul...that is not correct. An annulment is required only for a "valid" Catholic marriage. As Robert mentions, the wife was married by justice of peace only...there was never a Catholic marriage, therefore nothing to annul.

-- Mike (none@none.none), December 16, 2004.

Mike,

There is never anything to "annul". An "annulment" is simply an official statement to the effect that a valid marriage never existed. Therefore marriages which are invalid for any reason are precisely those which are subject to "annulment". A valid Catholic marriage cannot receive an annulment, since a statement of invalidity in such a case would be a lie.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 16, 2004.

The lie you mention, Paul, happens all the time in the Catholic Church.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), December 17, 2004.

Sometimes it does happen Karl. Not "all the time". Marriage tribunals are not perfect, any more than civil courts are. Errors occur in both. Abuses occur in both. Nevertheless, both serve legitimate and essential functions. Do you have any suggestions for circumventing human imperfection in such litigations?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 17, 2004.

Paul...sounds like we're playing word games with each other here and I really don't want to go there, especially since your last comment is basically agreeing with what I said in different words. The original poster asked if a non-Catholic marriage was required to be annuled in order to marry in the Catholic church. Your short answer was "yes", but in your alst post you agreed with me that the answer is "No" since there was never a valid marriage. By "valid Catholic marriage", I meant a marriage that was performed in the Catholic church. You know what I meant, so lets not split hairs here. Indeed, if for certain reasons it is later deemed that due to circumstances (ie: Grave lack of discretion on both parties) then it can be decided that although the intent was there, the sacrament did not take place, ie Annulment. Is this a lie on the part of the church? Really not worth debating IMO since we are both in agreeance.

Back the the original subject...if the marriage is civil only, then obviously an Annulment is not applicable.

BTW...I have followed several posts here and in general, I honestly do respect your opinions. Keep up the good work!

-- Mike (none@none.com), December 17, 2004.

One of the ways to address the human imperfections is to enforce strong sanctions when wrong has been done and adjudicated as such.

This simply is not done regarding annulments and the surrounding issues. It is an open and public denial of justice, systemically occurring within the entire tribunal system, and as such is reason enough to shut the entire system down until protocals that are followed are available to address charges of wrongdoing made by either the petitioner or the respondent.

If this system results in injustice, the Catholic Church is obligated to adequately address every one. If it does not it is responsible for planned, deliberate wrongdoing and all of the consequences and it owes restitution to each person who has been wronged.

I am a personal witness to countless wrongs, which the Catholic Church refuses to address. It is guilty as charged with moral certainty.

Thus your question was rhetorical in nature.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), December 18, 2004.

Robert,

Without using the "A" word, the simple rule is that anyone wishing to marry in the Catholic Church, if that person has been in a previous union recognized by any authority, must submit that prior union to scrutiny by the Catholic Church through her tribunals.

The Church does this to try and ensure that there are no impediments that prevent the proposed Catholic marriage from being invalid due to a prior union that would be recognized as a sacramental marriage. The goal is is to ensure integrity. The goal is not always achieved, but that does not mean we are not going to try.

Sometimes the process of scrutiny is short and clear-cut. Sometimes more obscure. Unlike many, you have a high expectation of the right outcome coming swiftly.

-- Pat Delaney (patrickrdelaney@yahoo.com), December 19, 2004.

Mike,

Your opinion is incorrect.

A Tribunal investigation (External Forum) formal or informal ONLY as prescribed by the competent ecclesiastical authority is ALWAYS required in ANY determinatrion of validity. Unless there is a nullity decree issue by the competent ecclesiastical authority a marriage is ALWAYS valid.

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 19, 2004.

To All,

Paul & Daniel are correct. If I read Mike accurately he is incorrect. An Annulment Process is required anytime a decree of nullity is sought. Even in the case of 2 Catholics marrying before a Justice of the Peace. Canon Law says such a marriage is invalid due to a lack of form. However, the way we declare that is through the Tribunal.

Hope that's helpful.

Fr. Michael

-- Rev. Michael Skrocki, JCL (abounamike@aol.com), December 20, 2004.

Sometimes it does happen Karl. Not "all the time". Marriage tribunals are not perfect, any more than civil courts are. Errors occur in both. Abuses occur in both. Nevertheless, both serve legitimate and essential functions. Do you have any suggestions for circumventing human imperfection in such litigations?

Paul,

I will set aside my normally shy and passive persona to put forth one suggestion that I would consider beneficial to families that are objectively suffering as result of discord, a suggestion that would be beneficial to spouses that are objectively suffering as result of discord, and a suggestion that would be beneficial to the common good -those within and those outside the Church.

Truth.

US Tribunals currently only require a civil divorce decree before 'processing' a petition for investigation.

A civil divorce decree addresses at best only the temporal nature of a spouse or spouses if the civil divorce is mutual. A civil divorce decree has absolutely NO bearing in Church matters -it does not address the supernatural aspect(s) of spouse(s), marriage or family.

US Tribunals should instead at minimum require two things: 1. the petitioner possess a valid decree from the local ordinary that permits separation, 2. the petitioner establish why restoration of conjugal living is impossible.

Requirements are clearly established in Canon Law; however, objectively not observed in application or in guidance set forth within US Norms.

To employ analogical metaphor -in matters of family and spousal discord the US Church through pastoral ministry, subordinate functionary and Norms as written and applied appears to me to be more that of compassioned mortician than objective physician...

SEPARATION WITH THE BOND REMAINING

1153 ��1. If either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too difficult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving, either by decree of the local ordinary or even on his or her own authority if there is danger in delay.

��2. In all cases, when the cause for the separation ceases, conjugal living must be restored unless ecclesiastical authority has established otherwise.

Can. 1154 After the separation of the spouses has taken place, the adequate support and education of the children must always be suitably provided.

Can. 1155 The innocent spouse laudably can readmit the other spouse to conjugal life; in this case the innocent spouse renounces the right to separate.

CASES OF SEPARATION OF SPOUSES

Can. 1692 ��1. Unless other provision is legitimately made in particular places, a decree of the diocesan bishop or a judicial sentence can decide the personal separation of baptized spouses according to the norm of the following canons.

��2. Where an ecclesiastical decision has no civil effects or if a civil sentence is not contrary to divine law, the bishop of the diocese of the residence of the spouses, after having weighed the special circumstances, can grant permission to approach the civil forum.

��3. If a case concerns only the merely civil effects of marriage, the judge, after having observed the prescript of ��2, is to try to defer the case to the civil forum from the start.

Can. 1693 ��1. Unless a party or the promoter of justice requests the ordinary contentious process, the oral contentious process is to be used.

��2. If the ordinary contentious process has been used and an appeal is proposed, the tribunal of second grade, observing what is required, is to proceed according to the norm of �� can. 1682, ��2.

Can. 1694 The prescripts of �� can. 1673 are to be observed in what pertains to the competence of the tribunal.

Can. 1695 Before accepting the case and whenever there is hope of a favorable outcome, the judge is to use pastoral means to reconcile the spouses and persuade them to restore conjugal living.

Can. 1696 Cases concerning the separation of spouses also pertain to the public good; therefore the promoter of justice must always take part in them according to the norm of can. 1433

-- Daniel Hawkenberry (dlm@catholic.org), December 20, 2004.

Daniel,

You have a far cooler temper than I.

The reason that the Catholic Church does not do things properly is that it needs the money from those who need their adulterous relationships to be normalized. It all comes down to money and power.

If the Church continues to loose its faithful, it will loose their money and it will loose their power, from their money. It is very simple. Churchmen want power and money helps buy power and influence.

If the Catholic Church were driven by the pursuit of truth and justice we would have a different Church. Truth and justice are only useful in how they can be manipulated to obtain or sustain wealth and power.

Why don't the priests who address this site answer for the charges that have been rendered. I am sure thay have all kinds of nice sounding excuses and ways to make the victims appear and sound to be guilty. None of them has the guts to take it to their ordinaries to have it slapped back in their faces for wasting their ordinaries time. They are blowhards masquerading as men of God. Just like their bosses the bishops are. The bishops are worse because they have the real power and lord it over the innocent while supporting the abusers, just as with the children.

This should get me deleted I bet, in spite of its truthful content.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), December 20, 2004.