B
Ben_Sinner
Guest
Would it be considered a null marriage by the Church if a baptized Lutheran married a non-baptized evangelical?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
Phemie
Guest
As long as they were both free to marry (not divorced or too closely related) then no, it would not be considered “null”. Because one of them is unbaptized it would be considered a valid, natural marriage.Would it be considered a null marriage by the Church if a baptized Lutheran married a non-baptized evangelical?
N
Neofight
Guest
The Church wouldn’t even weigh in…the Church would only speak on the validity of the marriage in regards to a Catholic marrying someone else.Would it be considered a null marriage by the Church if a baptized Lutheran married a non-baptized evangelical?
A Lutheran marrying a non-baptized evangelical would have no canonical standing in the Catholic Church.
P
Phemie
Guest
Actually, the Church would presume the marriage valid, as she does all the marriages of non-Catholics as long as there are no impediments such as a previous marriage or consanguinity or affinity and as long as their own religion (Orthodox, for example) considers it valid. If one or the other of the people in the OP decided to convert to Catholicism, there would be no need for a repeat of vows.The Church wouldn’t even weigh in…the Church would only speak on the validity of the marriage in regards to a Catholic marrying someone else.
A Lutheran marrying a non-baptized evangelical would have no canonical standing in the Catholic Church.
N
Neofight
Guest
Their decision to join the Church later is post facto;Actually, the Church would presume the marriage valid, as she does all the marriages of non-Catholics as long as there are no impediments such as a previous marriage or consanguinity or affinity and as long as their own religion (Orthodox, for example) considers it valid. If one or the other of the people in the OP decided to convert to Catholicism, there would be no need for a repeat of vows.
Whether they would or not is irrelevant…the Church has no standing in the question of marriage …they can’t excommunicated non communicants, they can only say that they view the,marriage as not valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church.
And if the Lutheran is baptized as a Lutheran (which follows the Trinitarian formuls) and the evangelical is also baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and they decide to come into full communion with the Catholic Church, they do Not “convrt”, hence they are NOT “converts”.
P
Phemie
Guest
The fact that it would not matter one iota to the non-Catholics doesn’t mean that it’s irrelevant.Whether they would or not is irrelevant…if is valid or invalid, the Church has no standing…they can’t excommunicated non communicants, they can only say that they view the,marriage as not valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church.
N
Neofight
Guest
Oh it does…“validity” is a precise legal term in canon law. This couple now is outside the jurisdiction of Canon law, which makes it irrelevant. …now if was asked do I THINK the marriage is valid, I could easy say that because I subscribe to the teaching of my Church it is…but that is far different from a legal reading.The fact that it would not matter one iota to the non-Catholics doesn’t mean that it’s irrelevant.
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
The short answer is that it would be valid, but not sacramental. Once the non-Baptized person got baptized, it would be a valid sacramental marriage. Neither party would have to convert to Catholicism for it to be valid and sacramental if both are baptized and have no prior impediments, and if they convert to Catholicism, they would not have to have their marriage validated in the Church–it is already valid.
T
Tarpeian_Rock
Guest
But there’s nothing about “conversion” in the OP. The premise of the original question would seem to be whether two non-Catholics can contract a valid marriage that would be recognized as such by the Church - which, any impediments aside, they certainly can, as “marriage enjoys the favor of the law,” as is often noted here. Catholic marriages aren’t the only “valid” ones. “Sacramental” is a different issue.
K
kdbueno
Guest
There are some baptisms that are not recognized by Vatican. Do contact your local parish priest, he knows whether you are or not.
M
McCartney
Guest
I read on this site that if two Christians marry without the presence of a Catholic minister, the Church does not consider that marriage valid and they are free to marry others (subject to having divorced). A friend of mine got married in the Methodist church without the presence of a Catholic minister. She is now divorced and a priest is now helping her to fill up a form called “Freedom to marry”.As long as they were both free to marry (not divorced or too closely related) then no, it would not be considered “null”. Because one of them is unbaptized it would be considered a valid, natural marriage.
P
PaulfromIowa
Guest
Catholics are required to marry in the Church unless they have a “dispensation from form” from their bishop. This does not apply to non-Catholics as the Church, obviously, cannot require them to have a Catholic wedding.I read on this site that if two Christians marry without the presence of a Catholic minister, the Church does not consider that marriage valid and they are free to marry others (subject to having divorced). A friend of mine got married in the Methodist church without the presence of a Catholic minister. She is now divorced and a priest is now helping her to fill up a form called “Freedom to marry”.
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
Yes, Baptized Lutheran, BL, and non-Baptized Evangelical, NBE, other things being equal, would be considered to be in a valid natural marriage.
Forget *converting *and/or *coming into full communion with the Church – They are still considered under Canon Law.
Suppose some time later BL and NBE divorce from each other and one or both seek to marry a Catholic(s) in a Catholic ceremony. The Church says: *“Oh, no. You are presumed to be validly married already and are not free to do so now.” *As long as the other party is alive, neither party would be free to marry unless and until their marriage to each other has been investigated and determined to have been null for some cause.
It can be even further removed: Suppose BL and NBE later divorce each other. Then BL attempts marriage to a Baptized Presbyterian, BP, before a Justice of the Peace. Then *they *divorce and BP later seeks to marry in the Catholic Church. BP, while BL lives, will not be free to marry in the Church unless and until the union to BL is investigated, which may also investigate the union of BL and NBE to determine to determine whether BL was free to marry BP. Neither BL nor NBE need ever go near a Canon Lawyer!
(* No conversion nor reception into full communion involved)
tee
**Disclaimer: **Who Is Not A Canon Lawyer
Forget *converting *and/or *coming into full communion with the Church – They are still considered under Canon Law.
Suppose some time later BL and NBE divorce from each other and one or both seek to marry a Catholic(s) in a Catholic ceremony. The Church says: *“Oh, no. You are presumed to be validly married already and are not free to do so now.” *As long as the other party is alive, neither party would be free to marry unless and until their marriage to each other has been investigated and determined to have been null for some cause.
It can be even further removed: Suppose BL and NBE later divorce each other. Then BL attempts marriage to a Baptized Presbyterian, BP, before a Justice of the Peace. Then *they *divorce and BP later seeks to marry in the Catholic Church. BP, while BL lives, will not be free to marry in the Church unless and until the union to BL is investigated, which may also investigate the union of BL and NBE to determine to determine whether BL was free to marry BP. Neither BL nor NBE need ever go near a Canon Lawyer!
(* No conversion nor reception into full communion involved)
tee
**Disclaimer: **Who Is Not A Canon Lawyer
- Status
- Not open for further replies.