Sorry pal, but I actually had a rather in-depth discussion with a priest in recent weeks concerning this very issue - the RCC considers marriage to be binding regardless of who performs it.
That's not what's at issue here, is it? Any marriage that is legally binding in accordance with the law of the land is also viewed as legally binding by the RCC just in conflict with Gods' law (missing the presence of God) and such union is not considered to be blessed by God hence no annulment necessary. If such a union was granted the divorce for whatever reason by whatever authority that issued it in the first place it is also annulled as far as the church is concerned. What's really at issue here is whether his previous marriage was in the presence of God, after all a Methodist church is a part of Protestant community and any union joined and blessed by their minister is viewed the same and in accordance with the RCC law. This makes it legally binding and lawful in accordance with the church law and civil authorities can't dissolve such a union. His civil divorce is irrelevant, only the civil bond of that union had been broken clearing the way for him to remarry as far as the law of the land is concerned but that's only half the battle. If his union was in presence of God the annulment of that union needs to take place before the priest/minister can remarry him/her again, be it in RCC or Methodist church and if such ceremony ever took place without an annulment of the previous union it would be absent of the Gods presence, not blessed by Him therefore not binding by the church law. Not only that no priest or minister would preside over such ceremony but it would be meaningless worth even less then civil union. It is yet to be determined if he took his wedding vows in a religious ceremony and by the same token receiving the sacrament of holy matrimony or not, another words in Gods' presence and according to His law, where this ceremony took place is irrelevant.
All he needs to do is go to his local Methodist parish ask the minister to check the records if he was ever married in accordance with the church law or was it simply a civil ceremony. If it was just that a civil ceremony get an affidavit with official seal testifying to that, the signature of the minister and present it to the priest who asked for it, than he's good to go, NO bribe necessary. If he was then he can grease whoever it takes to speed up the annulment process which btw would still have to be issued by the Methodist church as they have the authority over those proceedings in this case, as they are the ones who married him in the first place.
Honestly is that so hard to comprehend or do?
If you have a chip on your shoulder than you would rather talk of corruption and bribes but to be honest neither applies in this case. If you're gullible enough you might even do it but as I have explained in my previous post it would only be a donation, for it to classify as a bribe you would have to get something in return and how can you in this case? When the annulment is up to the Methodist authorities and without the affidavit stating it was only a civil union as far as Methodist church is concerned is still a no go as far as the Catholic priest and the church law is conserved.