A wedding question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Angelstar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the current law regarding disparity of cult when one of the parties is non believer and not baptized.

1637 In marriages with disparity of cult the Catholic spouse has a particular task: "For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband."138 It is a great joy for the Christian spouse and for the Church if this “consecration” should lead to the free conversion of the other spouse to the Christian faith.139 Sincere married love, the humble and patient practice of the family virtues, and perseverance in prayer can prepare the non-believing spouse to accept the grace of conversion.

The subscript refers to the new canon.

There is a concern, nonetheless and there is a dispensation that the bishop must grant.

1633 In many countries the situation of a mixed marriage (marriage between a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic) often arises. It requires particular attention on the part of couples and their pastors. A case of marriage with disparity of cult (between a Catholic and a nonbaptized person) requires even greater circumspection.

But the Church also teaches that this is not an insurmountable obstacle to a sacramental marriage.

1634 Difference of confession between the spouses does not constitute an insurmountable obstacle for marriage, when they succeed in placing in common what they have received from their respective communities

However, you do need the dispensation from the bishop.

1635 According to the law in force in the Latin Church, a mixed marriage needs for liceity the express permission of ecclesiastical authority.135 In case of disparity of cult an express dispensation from this impediment is required for the validity of the marriage.136 This permission or dispensation presupposes that both parties know and do not exclude the essential ends and properties of marriage and the obligations assumed by the Catholic party concerning the baptism and education of the children in the Catholic Church.

Under the new law, the Catholic party is the one who must promise to raise the children int he faith, etc. In the old law, the non-Catholic party had to promise to agree to this. This promise is no longer required of the non-Catholic party, but it is highly discussed in pre-cana classes and counseling. It is the obligation of the deacon in the parish to see to it that this is taken care of properly.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Br. JR, OSF-

Thank you for a very informative post, I did not know that.
 
JReducation said:
That was taken out of canon law in 1983. The wording now is that it is valid, if the parties meet the requirements of the Church. The Church requires only one of the parties be a baptized Catholic for validity. Validity constitutes sacrament in the new code. It no longer distinguishes between validity and sacrament. But it is the same thing. Check it out with a canon lawyer. In fact the new code doesn’t even require that the non-Catholic partner agree to raising the children Catholic. The Catholic partner must swear to make the best attempt possible. In some dioceses the bishop may requier it, but not the code of canon law.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
JR, you are mixing 2 things…valid and sacramental are 2 different things. A marriage when someone is not baptized is valid, but still not sacramental.

I never said anythign about it not being valid. I said it wasn’t sacramental.
 
lizaanne said:
Did I say “necessary”? I said considerations.

You need to get over this whole thing you have with other people getting married agapewolf. Every single time there is a discussion like this you are so bitter and nit-picky and combative.

Yes - I happen to think she DOES get it. You are just so focused on the fact that she does have other things she needs to consider in planning this day, that you refuse to see that in her VERY FIRST POST she says she wants to have a Mass!

Of course she understands her obligation - and if she didn’t at the start, you have made that painfully clear to her by now. Ok - so now that we have established that she MUST fulfill her Sunday obligation, let’s HELP the bride figure out how to make that happen within the context of everything else that needs to go on that day.

And yes - you do beat people up like this - often. It’s not nice. You clearly have a wealth of experience with the liturgy and weddings, please use this to teach and not to beat into submission.

~Liza
Click to expand...
Actually, you said “needs”. Which is short for necessary, so yes, you did.

So I see you have some axe to grind with me from the past? I’ve not done or said anything to you…my goodness. Not necessary to bring into this thread… Look, no she didn’t “get” the obligation part. Read her posts! She just wanted to slip in receiving the eucharist before taking pictures! It is obvious she didn’t get that one must need to attend mass. When it was mentioned that this a problem, the further posts indicated that she still didn’t get it.

I’ve done nothing wrong here, nor beat anyone up. I dont have a problem with people getting married, I have a problem with people focusing on peripheral tangent things that the circus wedding industry has created to the expense of their faith and marriages. I see it over and over with people caring about those things and not giving any care to their own salvation. This is seriously effecting their own freedom of entering into their marriages, and it is a very serious problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top