If a Catholic gets married outside the church and then divorces, and then wants to marry someone else in the church, Do they need an annulment? If the answer is yes,why? The church dosen’t reconize their first marriage anyway.
That’s true, the Church doesn’t recognize the first marriage, but the point of such an annulment is that it takes a legitimate authority in the Church to declare that the marriage wasn’t valid. The scenario you describe is handled by a petition on the grounds of “lack of form” and usually requires a much less in-depth investigation than a typical annulment.
It all depends. If you have two baptized people getting married in a church with a normal form, then you would need an annulment. I don’t think that just because one person is Catholic and the other isn’t plays into. I hear people call into Catholic Answers all the time with this basic questions.
Your pastor is the best person to talk to in this case.
This isn’t a real situation… I just had someone ask me this. I believe you do have to seek one, but it seems odd that you would since the church is saying a marriage never existed from the mere fact you didn’t get married in the church… Something I just thought of… If someone was in a same sex ceremony would they then have to get an annulment if they wanted to enter into a real marriage seeing that the church dosen’t recognize the same sex marriage the same as they don’t recognize the marriage outside the church…
I think you may be misunderstanding what “invalid” means in regard to the marriage. An existing hetero marriage as described in post 1 can be real and recognized as through a radical sanation. The “invalid” is the catholic did not obtain marriage properly(method of marriage), it is the Catholic’s failure which brings the “invalid” statement. In this post no marriage can occur, so the arrangement cannot be real or even a marriage. And the attempt at homosexual marriage shows an impediment to marry.
It depends on the bishop. Our bishop just has the pastor document everything but doesn’t require him to submit the case to the Tribunal. All you need to do is provide proof of baptism (a recent baptismal certificate which will show no marriage), proof of marriage outside the church, proof of divorce.
Your second scenario would probably make the priest confer with his bishop and make sure that the potential spouse is aware of the previous ‘marriage’ and freely and truly wants to marry a homosexual.
Because that attempt at Marriage was a public event. So the Church needs to address that public attempt and find it invalid and state so officially before another attempt can be allowed.
No different from the state requiring a civil divorce being recorded before another civil marriage can be entered imto. A person can’t just say we are not married any longer, there is a process that must be followed.
It is similar in our diocese except the paperwork must be submitted to the Tribunal to be checked that the t’s are crossed and the i’s dotted. It’s fairly automatic as if all the paperwork is there.
Also if the person wanting the annulment was previously married in a Christian (but non-Catholic) ceremony, I was told that the Church just does not willy-nilly go around invalidating Christian marriages, therefore they must go thru the annulment procedure. Also, if a couple married in a Christian ceremony converts they have their marriage convalidated by the Catholic church.
If a non-Catholic couple is validly married - i.e. no previous marriages, no impediments, etc - they do not have their marriage convalidated. For example, I had a Jewish couple come into the church a few years back. Their marriage was accepted as valid and became sacramental when they were baptized.
sounds correct to me
Also, if a couple married in a Christian ceremony converts they have their marriage convalidated by the Catholic church.
?? I am not following you here, if a once married Christian couple (no previous marriages) enters the church I think their marriages is presumed valid. If there were other marriages by either party the situation changes. Also if one was baptized catholic before the marriage and without a dispensation the situation is different.
I don’t think valid is the same as sacramental. However I am not as knowledgeable as you guys on this and will say you probably know more about this than me.
That is correct. But why wouldn’t a newly-Catholic couple want their marriage convalidated? What would be their reason?
My husband and I needed to have ours convalidated before I was allowed into the church, but we would have done this anyway, because we wanted our priest and our new Catholic friends to participate in our joy of a Catholic marriage. We did it at weekday Mass, no fuss, no distractionst. And we renewed our vows a year later, again at weekday Mass with our same witnesses in attendance.
So what could be the reason a couple wouldn’t want this?
There seems to be a confusion about what a convalidation is.
Convalidation is done to make an invalid legal marriage ‘valid’ in the Church. If the marriage is already valid there is nothing more to be done. Sure, you could have a renewal of vows but that’s not a convalidation.
If the non-Catholics had no impediments when they married, regardless of whether they married in their Church or at the courthouse, their marriage is considered valid. If they are both baptized it’s also sacramental. There is no need to do anything else.
In the original post it was a catholic outside the Church so we have condition 1 without dispensation, and condition 2 with dispensation. Condition 1 is invalid and not sacramental; condition 2 is valid and not sacramental. To be sacramental both parties have to be catholic (under the guides of the church). Both require an annulment before a second marriage attempt, condition 1 is an easier annulment because not one at the ceremony even claimed to follow the church. In condition 2 the catholic promised to follow the Catholic Church with a spouse who chose not to follow the church. Clear as mud?
Valid is on the participants, the couple knew and did the correct things
Licit is on the celebrant the priest/deacon/bishop knew and did the correct things
Sacramental is receiving grace inside god’s plan so to be sacramental you would need two practicing Catholics married and living god’s plan as man and wife.
Hope that helps
No, you would need two baptized persons married and living God’s plan as man and wife. They don’t have to be Catholic.
That would add Protestants in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th marriages, and now gay marriages in some places.
Well, no, since by definition none of the above are valid marriages – even if they are ‘legal’ marriages.
If they are not catholic there is no authority to declare their marriage valid or invalid.
But we are the ones declaring sacramentality, since most other Churches don’t consider marriage a sacrament. Since the Catholic Church says that 2 validly married baptized Christians are in a sacramental marriage she is also the one who defines “valid”.