Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Good News on the Law: Before You Say “I Do” to a Pre-Nup…
Good News Daily ^ | May 7, 2008 | Stephen Bloom

Posted on 05/07/2008 8:37:27 AM PDT by LikeLight

Are you a joyful bride-to-be? An eager (or nervous!) groom? Perhaps you have a son or daughter getting married this spring or summer? Perhaps a beloved grandchild? Or maybe a lifelong friend? The peak of wedding season is arriving and many of us have a special acquaintance or family member ready to “tie the knot” in a beautiful marriage ceremony of thrilling romance and holy commitment.

So what does any of this have to do with the law? Why am I raising the subject of weddings in my Christian legal column? I’m writing to brides and grooms and those close to them because I want to encourage you to build the strongest possible marriage from the beginning, a marriage built on the solid foundation of God and His Word. And I’m writing because I want to encourage you not to weaken or undermine that sacred foundation by relying on destructive legal “worldly wisdom” that commonly advises you not to get married without first entering a pre-nuptial agreement.

[snip]

In an era of frequent marital break-ups and complex family structures, our cynical culture and most secular lawyers portray anyone getting married without a pre-nup as either foolish or naive. Before the wedding day, we are warned, wise couples should agree in writing what will happen if and when the marriage dissolves. But is there something wrong with this pessimistic advice? Should Christians begin their sacred marriage relationship as if it were just another business deal? Is it healthy for a husband and wife to be forced into negotiating against one another as legal adversaries, each with their own attorneys, in the days or weeks before they are joined as “one flesh” in the eyes of God?

[snip]

(Excerpt) Read more at goodnewsdaily.net ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: catholic; christian; judeochristian; marriage; prenups; prenuptialagreement; religion; weddings
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last
To: LikeLight
Dear LikeLight,

Here's something from the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh. I just grabbed it because it came up high in the google, and it's generally representative of what I've learned myself:

http://www.diopitt.org/serves_tribunal_canon.php

Here's a key excerpt:

“PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENTS

“The use of prenuptial agreements has become much more commonplace in recent years. The presence of a prenuptial agreement presents an immediate concern in the marriage preparation process. It is suggested that the priest or deacon ask the couple about the possible presence of a prenuptial agreement at the initial meeting along with the questions about the possible presence of a prior marriage. The couple needs to understand that a prenuptial agreement may be an obstacle to a marriage in the Catholic Church. A legal document that protects the separate assets of the prospective spouses may well undermine the community of life that is essential to a marriage and may render it invalid.

“The case of a widow and widower who intend only to protect the natural right to inheritance of children of their first marriage may be an exception. This is clear if the prenuptial agreement provides for the disposition of the property in case of death rather than divorce. A prenuptial agreement that provides protection in the case of divorce may very well imply an exclusion of the permanence of marriage and, consequently, invalidate marital consent. In cases where one party has considerably more assets than the other and those assets are protected from the future spouse with no third party being benefited (such as elderly parents who spent their lives building a family business) it is hard to see how the couple is intending the community of life that is true marriage.

“The priest or deacon must not presume that any prenuptial agreement is acceptable. Before wedding plans can go forward, a copy of the prenuptial agreement needs to be sent to the Department for Canon and Civil Law Services for evaluation. The couple must be informed that the wedding plans are on hold until a determination is made as to whether the prenuptial agreement in question would render the marriage invalid. If it is determined that the prenuptial agreement is invalidating, the couple must rescind the agreement before plans for a Catholic wedding can resume.”

The general principle is that anything that envisions the “end” of a marriage through divorce suggests that the parties don't really mean “till death do us part,” and that mental reservation invalidates the marriage.


sitetest

41 posted on 05/07/2008 9:31:18 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight
After enduring a bad marriage and an even worse divorce to a "Christian" woman who was "100% committed" to God and me and married me "for life" I am convinced of one thing: Getting a pre-nup is a GREAT IDEA and being a "good steward" with what God gives you. Not having one is just plain STUPID. God doesn't change - including His intent for marriage. But people do. A pre-nup can only help if/when a divorce starts getting ugly. It may even keep divorce proceedings civil enough to make a reconciliation more possible.
42 posted on 05/07/2008 9:32:39 AM PDT by LiberConservative ("Typical" White Guy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight
But there are some good ones out there, and you're taking yourself out of contention.

I tend to think of it as removing myself from the line of fire. Truth is, there are several reasons I don't view myself suitable for marriage. The present rate of divorce only piles on top of all that.
43 posted on 05/07/2008 9:32:46 AM PDT by JamesP81 ("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

Bravo!My wife and I got married agreeing that failure was not an option.Marriage can be a job sometimes,you have to be willing to work at it.


44 posted on 05/07/2008 9:33:14 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (168 grains of instant conflict resolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rom
But maybe I am a naive fool. I say this much, if I am — my wife can have everything if we split. She is the mother of my children, and if I made such a grand mistake in the woman I chose to marry then that’s my punishment :) And if the fault is entirely mine and she divorces me, then I deserve it as well!

There's a great quote from someone... "A man is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose" - - - I think you get that. I think you're living that. Peace and blessings to you and your wife. She's blessed.

45 posted on 05/07/2008 9:35:02 AM PDT by LikeLight (http://www.believersguidetolegalissues.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight

I’m glad to see someone else looked it up for you! Steve and I were told about it when we did our marriage prep, but I didn’t have the canon law reference.


46 posted on 05/07/2008 9:39:16 AM PDT by nina0113 (If fences don't work, why does the White House have one?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR; Prokopton
Dear OpusatFR,

As Prokopton’s post at 39 points out, pre-nuptials aren't automatically invalidating, but as my post at 41 points out, they are viewed with suspicion, and the particulars of them can make it impossible to validly contract a Catholic marriage.

Use of pre-nups to protect the inheritance rights of children IN THE EVENT OF ONE'S DEATH are not generally invalidating. However, use of pre-nups to guard assets IN THE EVENT OF DIVORCE are invalidating. That's because entering into a pre-nup that specifically deals with what happens in the event of divorce is a mental reservation about the indissolubility of marriage through divorce.


sitetest

47 posted on 05/07/2008 9:40:21 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight
I think that the institution of marriage has been hijacked by the government. Once upon a time, the government merely recorded the marriage, but the actual marriage was conducted in a church. Nowadays, people look to the government to bless their marriages with a marriage license. Well, when an amoral, innately corrupt organization like the government is the institution which blesses your marriage, it only stands to reason that marriage will be cheapened and, of course, what the government blesses, it can also unbless (divorce).

For those who are inclined to follow the Bible, I think the operative words are "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" and "Render unto God what is God's". Does marriage belong to Caesar or to God? My understanding is that marriage is a sacred covenant with God, and therefore nobody should let the government get its grubby little fingers into their marriage. If a man and woman view marriage as the providence of God, and accept the blessing of their marriage only from God, then certainly the marriage cannot be dissolved simply because some government bureaucrat says it has been. That is one reason government should be kept out of it, in my opinion. The government will try to insert itself, anyway, with common law marriage principles, but as long as the married couple does not see the government as a member of their marriage, that won't matter.
48 posted on 05/07/2008 9:43:45 AM PDT by fr_freak (So foul a sky clears not without a storm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sitetest
Here's something from the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh. I just grabbed it because it came up high in the google, and it's generally representative of what I've learned myself...

It's amazing to me, as an Evangelical Protestant, how so many of the things I've "discovered" about the integration of Christianity and law turn out to be already well-known to Catholic thinkers. You have such a rich tradition of thoughtfully wrestling with these thorny matters. Thank you.

49 posted on 05/07/2008 9:44:38 AM PDT by LikeLight (http://www.believersguidetolegalissues.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81
It is nearly impossible to tell the good ones from the bad ones anymore.

You kind of have to take the good with the bad anymore. Since I married the last perfect one.

50 posted on 05/07/2008 9:46:10 AM PDT by ME-262 (Nancy Pelosi is known to the state of CA to render Viagra ineffective causing reproductive harm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All

Gotta go get lunch... Keep the fantastic conversation going... Thanks...


51 posted on 05/07/2008 9:47:58 AM PDT by LikeLight (http://www.believersguidetolegalissues.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

“Don’t get married. It is nearly impossible to tell the good ones from the bad ones anymore.”

Sadly, I have to agree with you. (FReeperettes excluded of course.) I am finding that as my assets grow, my willingness to enter marriage is diminished.


52 posted on 05/07/2008 10:08:11 AM PDT by CSM (Kakistocracy: Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sr4402
He regularly catches couples with His/Hers checking accounts and when he does he directs them to examine the Trust issues in their marriages and says it is not a financial issue but a Marital issue for possible counseling.

If he took passage on a ship with two separate watertight compartments, I suppose he'd call the designer and hector him about the trust issues with his engineering.

Sheesh.

53 posted on 05/07/2008 10:16:13 AM PDT by steve-b (The "intelligent design" hoax is not merely anti-science; it is anti-civilization. --John Derbyshire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

“Nope, Dave Ramsey says that Pre-Nuptuals are a symptom of distrust - a very bad sign.”

For the vast majority, you are correct. In some rare instances, I have heard him support a pre-nup. Those rare instances involved a large amount of wealth by either the bride or groom.


54 posted on 05/07/2008 10:18:32 AM PDT by CSM (Kakistocracy: Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: rom

Your (excellent) attitude is probably why you are still successfully married.

She probably has a good attitude, too.


55 posted on 05/07/2008 10:18:34 AM PDT by Marie2 (I used to be disgusted. . .now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: rom

“BTW, as to marriage statistics: claiming you are Christian doesn’t make you so! I’m not technically a Christian, but I would be willing to bet that the way we live our lives is more aligned with traditional Christianity than most of the people on the street who claim they are. Just as saying that you are a Republican doesn’t make you a conservative.”

Actually, many unbelievers get along with their spouses very well, much better often than when one turns to Christ (and thus friction is introduced).

A person is a Christian by being born of God, not by behaviour. C.S. Lewis wrote a piece once on Dick the Nice Atheist vs. Christian Miss Bates (who had a nasty personality). He explained that Dick’e niceness was merely a product of upbringing and who knows what a monster he’ll be in a million years when God knocks the slats out from under his human bed (we will all live forever).

Miss Bates, on the other hand, “will be very nice, indeed” by the time Christ is finished with her. He started something with her and He’ll finish it (no matter what it looks like now).

Even on a human level you don’t give a rip if your neighbor’s kid has better behaviour than your own. You’ll stand by your son because he is YOURS.

None of this is to knock you, by the way. I am so glad you do have a solid marriage. I have seen so much marital disaster in my life. These are dangerous times to play romantic games in.


56 posted on 05/07/2008 10:26:58 AM PDT by avenir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight

Even if you feel that you can fully trust your spouse-to-be, can you trust the lawyers and judges who will be involved in any divorce action?


57 posted on 05/07/2008 10:27:02 AM PDT by Coronal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sr4402
I've never been a fan of pre-nups; always thought of them as planning the fall back in event of failure. I can see how they would be necessary in the event of a marriage when one party or the other has a sizable estate, or family business, and children from a previous marriage.

As far as His/Her checking accounts are concerned, most of the accounts Hubby and I have are joint accounts, but when I was left a bit of money when my Mama died, he encouraged me to open my own accounts, in my own name. His thought was that, if he died suddenly, and I had no credit already in my own name, it could me more difficult for me to get it. Of course, that was before banks and organizations started sending credit card applications in the mail every other day!

But I see no problem having separate checking accounts, or even credit cards, as long as it isn't done to hide a money problem, or some other issue, on the part of either spouse. But I think it's crucial for both husband and wife to learn to handle the finances, in the event one dies unexpectedly.

58 posted on 05/07/2008 10:27:37 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight

In Orthodox Jewish tradition, they ALWAYS have a prenup. It’s not as technical or wordy as one a lawyer would draw up but the idea that prenup=easy divorce is flawed. The divorce rate in Orthodox Jewish communities is very, very low.

Having said that, if it’s a first marriage for both parties, why do you need a detailed pre-nup? OTOH, if one or both parties have children from a prior marriage, it would be stupid NOT to have a pre-nup for the sake of your children.


59 posted on 05/07/2008 10:32:02 AM PDT by Tamar1973 (Catch the Korean Wave, one Bae Yong Joon film at a time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rom
Marriage isn’t always happy, nor pretty. There will be rough times, but if both people are decent folks and committed to the relationship and the *children* then I find no reason for divorce. Both people have to know that stuff will happen in life.

My hubby, SirKit, got into a disagreement with his older sister once, because he contends that loyalty is more important in a marriage than feelings of love, because those can wax and wane over time. Folks can get angry with each other, but knowing, for sure, that this person will not leave you, simply because you made them mad for some silly reason, is a wonderful thing. It also puts the responsibility on the two of you to make your marriage the most fun and loving it can be, since it's yours and you're stuck with it. ;o)

We're coming up on 33rd anniversary, in October, and with the youngest going off to college in September, we're looking forward to a large measure of freedom in our lives. We're certainly looking forward to all four coming home to visit from time to time, but we're not dreading the 'empty nest' at all!

60 posted on 05/07/2008 10:39:29 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson