A non-catholic marrying a catholic.

[Cheshangle]

I never brought up strawman arguments.

And yes, it is worrying for me that so many people are endangering their immortal souls.

You seem very triumphalist about all this cheshangle, I now have my doubts that you are on this forum for honest reasons.

A chara

I fail to see how I am being dishonest or triumphalist, though I can understand why you are uncomfortable with what I say.

I was previously on the BBC “Christian topic” forum and stood shoulder to shoulder with RCs, fellow Anglicans and a Methodist against the sneering and faulty attacks of Protestant fundamentalists and militant “new atheists”. I chose this forum because some of the so-called “Christian” ones were anti-catholic.

All my neighbours and most of my friends in Ireland were RC and very welcoming and ecumenical, not least the priests, who I admired greatly.

I can give you various examples of ecumenism in the Diocese of Ferns if you’d like to hear them.

Le gra

 

[Cheshangle]

A chara

The quote from President McAleese comes from a leaflet circulated by a group called “women can be priests”, and entitled “Moving Women’s Ledership forward within the Catholic Church”. I have the leaflet in front of me. It is not hearsay. For further information you can access the website www.womenpriests.org

Presumably you do not deny that Mary McAleese openly received communion in a Church of Ireland Cathedral. And presumably you perceive her to be a “bad catholic”.

In contrast, one of the many things I admire about Ireland is that the Presidents have included two Protestants, an Englishman and two women. Contrast that to the sectarianism and bigotry of the north, only too clearly displayed (yet again) this week.

A chara.

 

[LDNCatholic]

I fail to see how I am being dishonest or triumphalist, though I can understand why you are uncomfortable with what I say.

Then you can understand how I see your constant bringing up of ‘‘I have a friend who left the Church’’ or ‘‘I have a friend who is Catholic and raising their child out of the faith’’ or ‘‘Well my friend is a Catholic and they take communion at [insert Protestant church]’’ as triumphalist.

All my neighbours and most of my friends in Ireland were RC and very welcoming and ecumenical, not least the priests, who I admired greatly.

Yep, Ecumenism is great stuff, but never at the expense of the Truth of the Catholic faith.

I can give you various examples of ecumenism in the Diocese of Ferns if you’d like to hear them.

Le gra

Go right ahead, it would be interesting, let’s hope there’s no inter-communion or mortal sins being committed in the cause of warm fuzzy feelings of false unity.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Presumably you do not deny that Mary McAleese openly received communion in a Church of Ireland Cathedral. And presumably you perceive her to be a “bad catholic”.

Unless confessed, Mary McAleese is in a state of mortal sin. If she is refusing to confess it certainly does make her a bad Catholic.

 

[Cheshangle]

Then you can understand how I see your constant bringing up of ‘‘I have a friend who left the Church’’ or ‘‘I have a friend who is Catholic and raising their child out of the faith’’ or ‘‘Well my friend is a Catholic and they take communion at [insert Protestant church]’’ as triumphalist.

Yep, Ecumenism is great stuff, but never at the expense of the Truth of the Catholic faith.

Go right ahead, it would be interesting, let’s hope there’s no inter-communion or mortal sins being committed in the cause of warm fuzzy feelings of false unity.

Oh dear. Well, we certainly seem to get comments here, especially from converts, which are not entirely charitable about Anglicanism.

Some examples of healthy ecumenism:

i) Church Unity Week in Ferns Diocese where joint services are held. On one such occasion our CofI (ex-RC) Rector, referred to sectarianism as “the work of the Devil”. Which indeed it is.

ii) I’ve already mentioned joint marriages and joint baptisms. Agreement on this was reached between the CofI and RC Bishops when the daughter of the former married a RC.

iii) Our Sexton was RC. When she died the funeral in the local Augustinian church was conducted jointly by the RC Priest and the CofI Rector.

iv) The only CofI boy at Clongowes Wood College, a Jesuit School in Dublin, was prepared for CofI confirmation by a Jesuit priest.

v) When our organist was absent, a local (devout) RC stepped in to play for us.

vi) When the RC Cathedral in Enniscorthy was closed for refurbishment, RC masses were held in the CofI church in the town.

You can understand why I found living in Ireland so refeshing.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Oh dear. Well, we certainly seem to get comments here, especially from converts, which are not entirely charitable about Anglicanism. .

You’re on Catholic Answers mate, not Protestant Answers. If we were entirely favourable towards Anglicanism, we’d be Anglican.

We’re not going to Anglican forums to be triumphalist over the Ordinariate so the comparison falls flat. You ARE on a Catholic forum, being generally smug about Catholics breaking major rules of the Faith in order to fit in with stereotypical Anglican fuzzy wuzzy Ecumenism.

 

[Cheshangle]

That’s all fair enough. I also believe that the apostolic churches are the font of Christianity. Clearly we differ about Anglicanism, but what you say does not sound to me (at any rate) to be harsh or unforgiving. And I have never met an Irish person who suffered from lack of eloquence!

 

[Cheshangle]

You’re on Catholic Answers mate, not Protestant Answers. If we were entirely favourable towards Anglicanism, we’d be Anglican.

We’re not going to Anglican forums to be triumphalist over the Ordinariate so the comparison falls flat. You ARE on a Catholic forum, being generally smug about Catholics breaking major rules of the Faith in order to fit in with stereotypical Anglican fuzzy wuzzy Ecumenism.

Thanks, mate. I’ve certainly come across RCs who are triumphant about the Ordinariate. I’m not saying you are.

The Conduct Rules section of House Rules state than non-Catholics must be respectful of the faith of the Catholic participants. I am, mate.

They also state that Catholics must be charitable in their discussions about non-Catholic belief or practice. Are you, mate? “Stereotypical Anglican fuzzy wuzzy Ecumenism”. Hardly a charitable phrase, is it, mate?

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Just to clarify this, the children do not HAVE to be raised Catholic. The Catholic partner must promise to do all in his/her power to raise their children in the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church acknowledges that this leaves room for the possibility that the children would not be raised as Roman Catholics because it also acknowledges the rights and duties of the other party involved.

Someone else said in this thread that Roman Catholics rarely convert when they get married. I wonder if that person has seen a thread that said that for a large portion of former Roman Catholics the reason they had converted was because they got married to someone from a mainline church?

This is not true, friend. Having just married a non-Catholic, I can tell you that I had to acknowledge my duty to raise our children in the Church – this means teaching them to know and practice the faith, having them baptized in infancy and preparing them for their sacraments, etc. The Church does not allow a Catholic to raise his/her children in another faith.

From Canon Law;

Canon 226.1 Those who are married are bound by the special obligation, in accordance with their own vocation, to strive for the building up of the people of God through their marriage and family.

Canon 226.2 Because they gave life to their children, parents have the most serious obligation and the right to educate them. It is therefore primarily the responsibility of christian parents to ensure the christian education of their children in accordance with the teaching of the Church.

Canon 1059 The marriage of catholics, even if only one party is baptised, is governed not only by divine law but also by canon law, without prejudice to the competence of the civil authority in respect of the merely civil effects of the marriage.

Canon 1125 The local Ordinary can grant this permission if there is a just and reasonable cause. He is not to grant it unless the following conditions are fulfilled:

Canon 1125.1** the catholic party is to declare that he or she is prepared to remove dangers of defecting from the faith, and is to make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power in order that all the children be baptised and brought up in the catholic Church;**

Canon 1125.2 the other party is to be informed in good time of these promises to be made by the catholic party, so that it is certain that he or she is truly aware of the promise and **of the obligation **of the catholic party.

(emphasis added)

As you can see, it is a Catholic’s grave responsibility to raise his or her children as Catholics, regardless of the faith of the other parent.

Peace,
Dante

 

[nhylan]

This is not true, friend. Having just married a non-Catholic, I can tell you that I had to acknowledge my duty to raise our children in the Church – this means teaching them to know and practice the faith, having them baptized in infancy and preparing them for their sacraments, etc. The Church does not allow a Catholic to raise his/her children in another faith.

From Canon Law;

As you can see, it is a Catholic’s grave responsibility to raise his or her children as Catholics, regardless of the faith of the other parent.

Peace,
Dante

Dante, I’m sorry but your quote only proved what I said was true. You must do everything in your power. That doesn’t mean you MUST. That means you must try to. There is absolutely wiggle room in this and diocese around the world acknowledge this.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Dante, I’m sorry but your quote only proved what I said was true. You must do everything in your power. That doesn’t mean you MUST. That means you must try to. There is absolutely wiggle room in this and diocese around the world acknowledge this.

And when Christ said “You must be perfect”, he was saying we should do our best – knowing we would fail. The point is that, when one fails, one is to get up and try again. There is NOT “wiggle room” enough to allow a Catholic to concede to raising his child in a non-Catholic religion. Catholics have a duty and obligation to train their children in the Catholic faith and its practice; whether the child ultimately abandons that faith is beyond the parent’s control, but it is the parent’s duty and obligation to do his best to lay a strong enough foundation that such will not occur.

This is absolutely not the same as enabling the Catholic to allow his child to be raised in another faith.

Peace,
Dante

 

[nhylan]

And when Christ said “You must be perfect”, he was saying we should do our best – knowing we would fail. The point is that, when one fails, one is to get up and try again. There is NOT “wiggle room” enough to allow a Catholic to concede to raising his child in a non-Catholic religion. Catholics have a duty and obligation to train their children in the Catholic faith and its practice; whether the child ultimately abandons that faith is beyond the parent’s control, but it is the parent’s duty and obligation to do his best to lay a strong enough foundation that such will not occur.

This is absolutely not the same as enabling the Catholic to allow his child to be raised in another faith.

Peace,
Dante

So your the only one who has commented on what I said earlier who disagrees with what I said. The Catholic Church concedes that the non-Catholic partner has just as much a duty and responsibility to see the child raised in the way he or she deems most appropriate as well as the Catholic Party. It’s not like I got married to a Catholic and I had to agree no matter what, no matter what i think, the children MUST MUST MUST be raised Roman Catholic. That’s not the spirit of these rules despite how you are choosing to interpret them.
On top of that, the Roman Catholic Church agrees that the sacred unity of the marriage is of paramount importance and if the catholic partner feels that trying to raise the children as Catholics would endanger that unity then the unity is more important than the education of the child as a Roman Catholic.

From Matrimona Mixta, 1970

Furthermore, the Catholic partner in a mixed marriage is obliged, not only to remain steadfast in the faith, but also, as far as possible, to see to it that the children be baptized and brought up in that same faith and receive all those aids to eternal salvation which the Catholic Church provides for her sons and daughters.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

So your the only one who has commented on what I said earlier who disagrees with what I said. The Catholic Church concedes that the non-Catholic partner has just as much a duty and responsibility to see the child raised in the way he or she deems most appropriate as well as the Catholic Party. It’s not like I got married to a Catholic and I had to agree no matter what, no matter what i think, the children MUST MUST MUST be raised Roman Catholic. That’s not the spirit of these rules despite how you are choosing to interpret them.
On top of that, the Roman Catholic Church agrees that the sacred unity of the marriage is of paramount importance and if the catholic partner feels that trying to raise the children as Catholics would endanger that unity then the unity is more important than the education of the child as a Roman Catholic.

From Matrimona Mixta, 1970

Furthermore, the Catholic partner in a mixed marriage is obliged, not only to remain steadfast in the faith, but also, as far as possible, to see to it that the children be baptized and brought up in that same faith and receive all those aids to eternal salvation which the Catholic Church provides for her sons and daughters.

I’m also the only person who has provided evidence to back up his claim, in the form of several relevant citations from current Canon Law. The citation you gave only backs up my position, I’m afraid.

When I entered into marriage prep with my non-Catholic spouse, she was made fully aware of my obligation to raise my children as Catholics. She is under no constraints in that regard, but it would have been absolute folly to enter into a marriage if she had not assented to that obligation.

Now, can you provide some evidence of the following claims you’ve made?

1. That the Catholic Church “concedes that the non-Catholic partner has just as much a duty and responsibility to see the child raised in the way he or she deems most appropriate as well as the Catholic Party”
2. That a Catholic is free to allow his children to be raised in another Church
3. That, in the view of the Church, the Catholic upbringing of children is less important than marital “unity” between spouses of mixed religious background

Peace,
Dante

 

[Cheshangle]

And when Christ said “You must be perfect”, he was saying we should do our best – knowing we would fail. The point is that, when one fails, one is to get up and try again. There is NOT “wiggle room” enough to allow a Catholic to concede to raising his child in a non-Catholic religion. Catholics have a duty and obligation to train their children in the Catholic faith and its practice; whether the child ultimately abandons that faith is beyond the parent’s control, but it is the parent’s duty and obligation to do his best to lay a strong enough foundation that such will not occur.

This is absolutely not the same as enabling the Catholic to allow his child to be raised in another faith.

Peace,
Dante

So to be perfect one must be RC?

 

[Cheshangle]

I’m also the only person who has provided evidence to back up his claim, in the form of several relevant citations from current Canon Law. The citation you gave only backs up my position, I’m afraid.

When I entered into marriage prep with my non-Catholic spouse, she was made fully aware of my obligation to raise my children as Catholics. She is under no constraints in that regard, but it would have been absolute folly to enter into a marriage if she had not assented to that obligation.

Now, can you provide some evidence of the following claims you’ve made?

1. That the Catholic Church “concedes that the non-Catholic partner has just as much a duty and responsibility to see the child raised in the way he or she deems most appropriate as well as the Catholic Party”
2. That a Catholic is free to allow his children to be raised in another Church
3. That, in the view of the Church, the Catholic upbringing of children is less important than marital “unity” between spouses of mixed religious background

Peace,
Dante

As I think I’ve mentioned, my brother’s an agnostic, and he married a RC. Bringing the children up as RCs, which they did more or less, was no great problem to him, and they’re still happily married 42 years on.

But as an Anglican it would have been far more difficult for me. I would have been happy for the boys to be brought up in their father’s faith and the girls in their mother’s, but not for all of them to be RC. That would imply my accepting that my church is somehow inferior, and I couldn’t do that.

I’ve used the expression “give and take”. Without that, a marriage is unlikely to work in any case. Can you imagine how I would have felt if my children had been taught that my faith was somehow “invalid”?

 

[KWR_1]

Hello everyone.
So, basically, I’m a non-Catholic, but I was baptized as a Lutheran Protestant. So my father withdraw my religion at the age of 11, reason for that is he wanted me to choose my own religion. At present, I don’t have any religion, but I see myself as an Agnostic person.
So my question is, is it OK to marry a Catholic?
Thank you for taking your time in answering my question

Yes, You two could always select the Episcopal Church to marry in as a compromise.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

So to be perfect one must be RC?

You’re putting words in my mouth.

Peace,
Dante

 

[DanteAlighieri]

As I think I’ve mentioned, my brother’s an agnostic, and he married a RC. Bringing the children up as RCs, which they did more or less, was no great problem to him, and they’re still happily married 42 years on.

But as an Anglican it would have been far more difficult for me. I would have been happy for the boys to be brought up in their father’s faith and the girls in their mother’s, but not for all of them to be RC. That would imply my accepting that my church is somehow inferior, and I couldn’t do that.

I’ve used the expression “give and take”. Without that, a marriage is unlikely to work in any case. Can you imagine how I would have felt if my children had been taught that my faith was somehow “invalid”?

The bottom line is that a Catholic has an obligation to raise his children as Catholics. The Church teaches that it is the pillar and ground of truth; that it is the Church that Christ founded and imbued with the authority to teach in His name. How can a faithful Catholic teach his children that his Church contains the fullest truth while also allowing them to practice another faith? This does a disservice to both faiths, and since the Catholic is the one with a moral obligation to raise his children in his own church, he is betraying his own faith on top of misguiding his children.

“Give and take” is, indeed, vital for a marriage – but not when it comes to the truth. We cannot compromise on that which is true; it either is or it isn’t. This is why the Church strongly recommends that Catholics marry other Catholics – in fact, it takes special permission for exceptions to that rule. With respect, a Catholic who would have to dilute his/her faith because of his/her spouse should honestly consider whether that person is an appropriate choice for marriage.

Peace,
Dante

 

[DanteAlighieri]

Yes, You two could always select the Episcopal Church to marry in as a compromise.

Friend, this is not true. Catholics are not allowed to compromise on our faith. We are obligated to marry within the Church unless we receive explicit permission from the bishop.

Also, we have a grave responsibility to raise our children as Catholics. If you refer to one of my earlier posts, you will see the relevant citations from the Canon Law of the Church. This is not subject to personal whim; it is our duty as Catholics.

Peace,
Dante

 

[Jay53]

The bottom line is that a Catholic has an obligation to raise his children as Catholics. The Church teaches that it is the pillar and ground of truth; that it is the Church that Christ founded and imbued with the authority to teach in His name. How can a faithful Catholic teach his children that his Church contains the fullest truth while also allowing them to practice another faith? This does a disservice to both faiths, and since the Catholic is the one with a moral obligation to raise his children in his own church, he is betraying his own faith on top of misguiding his children.

“Give and take” is, indeed, vital for a marriage – but not when it comes to the truth. We cannot compromise on that which is true; it either is or it isn’t. This is why the Church strongly recommends that Catholics marry other Catholics – in fact, it takes special permission for exceptions to that rule. With respect, a Catholic who would have to dilute his/her faith because of his/her spouse should honestly consider whether that person is an appropriate choice for marriage.

Peace,
Dante

VERY well said!!! (Especially the last sentence!)