Remarriage without annullment?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread
I just "happened" on this forum as I was looking for some answers to a marriage after divorce question. Actually, I think I was lead here.
My question is can divorced Catholics re-marry in the Church without having their previous marriages annulled? I was married for twenty years, and I have four kids, so having the marriage annulled sounds to me like it never happened and shouldn't have been. It makes it sound like the kids were bastard children. It doesn't make any sense to me. How can the Church recognize that the marriage was valid all those years, and now twenty-five years later say it didn't happen? My fiancee and I are both lifelong Catholics, and feel that getting married outside the Church shouldn't be an option. Is there such a thing as a "righteous divorce" in the eyes of the Chuch? Mine was due to adultery, and hers was due to mental illness and abuse. Do the circumstances matter?
Unfortunately, my parish priest isn't real easy to talk with, if you can even get the chance to talk with him, but that is on my agenda. I'd appreciate any information or direction as to the options we have here. Thanks.
-- Fran (on MD's Eastern Shore) (email@example.com), February 27, 2002
I am weak on the complete facts so others will add to this but I do know that all Christain marriages even non-Catholic ones must be annulled before you may remarry. Of course the situations you mention such as adultery, mental illness and abuse are significant. These things will be talked about as you go through the process.
Do not think of your children as bastard. That idea is not true at all regardless of the annullment proceeding results. They are first and foremost children of God whom he let you raise up for him and for us all to love and be loved by. Bastard implies that they are worse than just suffering from original sin. We are saved first by baptism and not by the status of our family. Remember that many Gentiles were grafted onto the vine. Bastard also means: "something that is spurious, irregular, inferior, or of questionable origin"; now that describes the whole human race when compared to Jesus but the blood of the cross and my own willingness to participate in his plan corrects this.
-- Mike H (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 27, 2002.
Mike, I agree with your answer to Fran.
The Church will not say anything negative about the children. Legitimacy is a matter pertaining to civil law, not to the validity of marriage.
Fran, you asked: "How can the Church recognize that the marriage was valid all those years, and now twenty-five years later say it didn't happen?"
You have made an incorrect assumption. The Church did not "recognize [your] marriage [as] valid." She only assumed that it was valid. Now, after careful analysis, she may find that the assumption was incorrect all along. One crucial thing that Mike did not mention was the fact that the tribunal's decision is made based on what was true on your wedding day -- whether or nor there was an impediment, whether or not the couple gave true and free consent to a matrimonial bond. Do not depend, as a couple in a divorce court does, on bad things that happened later. They may not have anything to do with the wedding-day situation.
Please take time to read about some more nullity situations in this category folder.
God bless you.
-- (email@example.com), February 27, 2002.
Just dropping as I had been asked to do so as I very seldom am interested in same old subjects here. The term BASTARD was implimented by Church Fathers during the 10th Century due to the fact of so many priest having " sired " offsprings.
It was during this period these children rather then continuing in the footsteps of the loving fathers asked for ther entitled inheritance.
The result was all priest's unions were nullified and the offspring were not at any level acknowledged by the Church of Rome hence fatherless bastards.
-- Jean Bouchard (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 28, 2002.
An authority that disagrees with Jean's
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
\Bas"tard\, n. [OF. bastard, bastart, F. b?tard, prob. fr. OF. bast, F. b?t, a packsaddle used as a bed by the muleteers (fr. LL. bastum) + -ard. OF. fils de bast son of the packsaddle; as the muleteers were accustomed to use their saddles for beds in the inns. See Cervantes, ``Don Quixote,'' chap. 16; and cf.G. bankert, fr. bank bench.]
-- cathy in slovenia (email@example.com), February 28, 2002.
Jean may be Joel or his offspring. Jean wrote another goofy answer on different thread just now also. I would ignore his posts today.
-- Mike H (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 28, 2002.
The word is also used to refer to a type of file that is used in shaping metals and other functions. One needs to go further to find the use of that word. It may be of old English derivative.
-- Fred Bishop (email@example.com), February 28, 2002.
Well; THIS one should certainly be ignored. It stinks of the ignorance of anti-Catholic slurs over many hundreds of years.
I've heard the subject of ''inheritance'' of children of priests as a pretext for not allowing married priests. It is an old calumny very popular among Italians. Italy, despite being so identified with the Holy See, has been hotbed of Freemasonry, irreverence, and just plain atheism for as long as the Medicis and before. In Italy, unfortunately, MONEY has always motivated the irreligious, as the evil of the Mafia makes clear.
An offshoot of this evil is the contempt in which priests and religious are often held. No reputation is safe from these factions. Money and greed are usually the slurs and evil talk associated there with anti-Catholicism.
There are probably other societies in the world just as bad as Italy. And, Italy has been the site of many glorious triumphs for the faith as well, to be fair. Italy numbers as its own countless saints and holy martyrs; even today, we suppose. What is our part in this picture?
We all must pray for good priests.
-- eugene c. chavez (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 28, 2002.
Especially to Mike H, Cathy, and other "newbies:"
Jean Bouchard is a Canadian gentleman who used to be a "regular" at the forum in the 1998 - 2000 time frame. Now he seems to stop in once every six months or so to remind some of us that he is still alive!
My recollection is that he is unpredictable, sometimes leaving a genuinely insightful post, sometimes leaving something that he ought to be very ashamed of.
When he goes wrong, it is because he has fallen prey to extreme political liberalism and the kind of doctrinal/moral heterodoxy that seems inevitably to get entwined in it. As I recall, he has a deep distrust for what the heterodox like to label "the institutional church" (popes and orthodox bishops).
Jean unfailingly errs in the direction of mercy, not having much use for justice. He has a hard time seeing certain sins as intrinsically evil, so he would excuse people after they have done certain very bad things [e.g., receiving Communion, though divorced/remarried] out of his misplaced "compassion."
God bless you.
-- (email@example.com), February 28, 2002.
May I ask if there ever has been any posting of a thread on the Freemasonry? I am curious about that subject knowing of it through the K of C of which I am a member. We are very much against it and the Popes of the past have clearly spoken out on the Cult too. If not I would be curious if it would be wise to start a thread on it to see where it would go. Thanks be to GOD --- FRED
-- Fred Bishop (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 28, 2002.
Here's one: link
-- Glenn (email@example.com), March 01, 2002.
My thanks to you and Interesting too.
-- Fred Bishop (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 01, 2002.