Best Man

[Br.Rich_SFO]

yes, obviously, but that really doesn’t help me. I’m wondering what the Catholic church’s teachings is. Is it that all protestant weddings that involve a divorcee are invalid?

Yes.

 

[andersonbd1]

Why does it matter if she is Catholic or not? The law against Re-marriage after Divorce is not the Catholic Churches, it’s Christ’s law and applies to all persons Protestant and Catholic!

my understanding is it matters because Catholics have the option (and the duty) to declare their marriages null if they wish to remarry. Protestants don’t have that option. The Catholic teaching is that there exist marriages that for whatever reason were not valid (Catholic and Protestant). When tribunal declares a marriage void - they are recognizing that it never happened, correct? So then there must be Protestant marriages which are not valid.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

agreed. I have absolutely no intention of doing so. So do we assume validity or invalidity? Obviously the assumption isn’t always right, but since we’re not making the judgment personally we have to make it so that we have something to make decisions based on.

I’m assuming that I should assume invalidity (of the original marriage that is). So I guess I’ll try to sidestep my way into finding out if she’s Catholic.

If a person is attempting a second Marriage after a divorce from a marriage that was of the public record.

They must show that the first Marriage was invalid for some reason before a Catholic should consider participating in it.

Care should be takes from a moral standpoint that you are not participating in the sin of another. It would be your moral obligation to do so.

 

[andersonbd1]

They must show that the first Marriage was invalid for some reason before a Catholic should consider participating in it.

How does that work? Who are they proving this to? They probably have no intrinsic motivation to do so. It might just be better for me to decline to participate? I’ve heard that attendance might be ok (in contrast to being one standing up front)?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

How does that work? Who are they proving this to? They probably have no intrinsic motivation to do so. It might just be better for me to decline to participate? I’ve heard that attendance might be ok (in contrast to being one standing up front)?

Knowing what you know, you need to satisfy your conscience. There is a difference between participation and attending, and you must weight the good in support of family, for instance, against your your obligation to not give the idea of your approval.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

my understanding is it matters because Catholics have the option (and the duty) to declare their marriages null if they wish to remarry. Protestants don’t have that option. The Catholic teaching is that there exist marriages that for whatever reason were not valid (Catholic and Protestant). When tribunal declares a marriage void - they are recognizing that it never happened, correct? So then there must be Protestant marriages which are not valid.

That is correct. A Catholic who is divorced does not “obtain an Annulment”. they ask the Tribunal to look at the Marriage and see if something might be missing that is needed for a valid Marriage. There are Protestant Marriages that are invlaid, yes. However a Protestant has either separated themselves or choose to remain separated from the Catholic Church, which places themselves in this position.

 

[recidite_plbs]

If a person is attempting a second Marriage after a divorce from a marriage that was of the public record.

They must show that the first Marriage was invalid for some reason before a Catholic should consider participating in it.

Care should be takes from a moral standpoint that you are not participating in the sin of another. It would be your moral obligation to do so.

A fine argument between catholics, but if 2 people who are not catholic, and possibly don’t even believe God exists want to get married, who should stop them?

The thing is, you can’t impose your beliefs on other people, irrespective of how firmly you hold your beliefs or well intioned they may be.

To that end, would the refusal of the OP to attend the wedding on a point of principle that the couple themselves do not share do anything other than break a friendship and show Catholicism in a cold, uncaring, rule-bound light or have them in any way change their intentions? Would the attendance and participation of a catholic condone the marriage any more or less than a civil or other wedding? The answer is not really, so what good would any consciencious objection serve?

 

[andersonbd1]

The groom is a devout christian (not Catholic). I would assume his bride is as well. So, I would think if her first marriage was invalid, then this marriage would be a valid, sacramental marriage. It either is or it isn’t, right?

If her original marriage was not valid, then this new marriage will be valid. I may not know for sure if it is or isn’t. However could exist certain facts that would make it obvious, right?

1. If I’m not sure whether it’s going to be valid or not, I guess I’m leaning towards participating. I was curious where the burden of proof lies. From what I’m hearing this is a judgment call. I haven’t found any Church teaching on this.
2. If, however, I come across facts which would make it obvious that the ceremony is not valid, then I’d have to not participate. I’m not sure if there even could be any facts which would guarantee validity in the first marriage, right? If that’s the case and I’m erring on the side of participation, then I think maybe I should not go probing.

 

[kage_ar]

You are one person, you are not a Tribunal commissioned by the Church. I’d not think it wise to determine yourself if the first marriage was valid (FYI, a marriage can be valid and NOT be Sacramental. All Sacramental marriages are valid, but not the other way around.)

We give benefit of validity to marriage, so, if this woman were to walk in to St. Whomever parish tomorrow, the Church would assume her first marriage valid until proven invalid by a competent tribunal.

If these friends respect your faith, they expect you to stand up for the truth.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

A fine argument between catholics, but if 2 people who are not catholic, and possibly don’t even believe God exists want to get married, who should stop them?

The thing is, you can’t impose your beliefs on other people, irrespective of how firmly you hold your beliefs or well intioned they may be.

To that end, would the refusal of the OP to attend the wedding on a point of principle that the couple themselves do not share do anything other than break a friendship and show Catholicism in a cold, uncaring, rule-bound light or have them in any way change their intentions? Would the attendance and participation of a catholic condone the marriage any more or less than a civil or other wedding? The answer is not really, so what good would any consciencious objection serve?

I don’t believe that anyone has said that the couple must live by the beliefs of the OP, only that the OP must. I don’t see how living out my Catholic beliefs in what I do or don’t do, in any way imposes those beliefs on anyone else?

 

[andersonbd1]

If these friends respect your faith, they expect you to stand up for the truth.

So I should just tell them that because she was previously married and because I believe (following Jesus and the Catholic Church’s teaching) that marriage is eternal that I cannot participate in this wedding? I wish them the best and will attend and will support them in their lives, but I cannot endorse their marriage.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

So I should just tell them that because she was previously married and because I believe (following Jesus and the Catholic Church’s teaching) that marriage is eternal that I cannot participate in this wedding? I wish them the best and will attend and will support them in their lives, but I cannot endorse their marriage.

If it were me I would tell them, I wish them the best and will attend. But can’t participate because she was previously Married and that I must follow my conscience on the teaching of Jesus on divorce and re-marriage. Mark 10:11-12, Lk 16:18

 

[kage_ar]

If it were me I would tell them, I wish them the best and will attend. But can’t participate because she was previously Married and that I must follow my conscience on the teaching of Jesus on divorce and re-marriage. Mark 10:11-12, Lk 16:18

I would suggest this with a modification.

“I can’t be your best man.”

If you are then pressed for a why give the explination.

“I love you and care for you, but you know I am Catholic. I must follow my conscience on the teaching of Jesus on divorce and re-marriage. Mark 10:11-12, Lk 16:18”

 

[Newbie2]

If it were me I would tell them, I wish them the best and will attend. But can’t participate because she was previously Married and that I must follow my conscience on the teaching of Jesus on divorce and re-marriage. Mark 10:11-12, Lk 16:18

So what, in terms of conscience, is the difference between standing up and attending the wedding? Attending is witnissing, no?

 

[andersonbd1]

So what, in terms of conscience, is the difference between standing up and attending the wedding? Attending is witnissing, no?

was wondering that myself. And can I say, “I’m happy for you?”

 

[kage_ar]

was wondering that myself. And can I say, “I’m happy for you?”

I could not say that to my friend, I could say “I care for and am praying for you both”.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

So what, in terms of conscience, is the difference between standing up and attending the wedding? Attending is witnissing, no?

There is a difference between actively participating in an invalid attempt at a Sacrament and simply being there observing.

 

[kage_ar]

So what, in terms of conscience, is the difference between standing up and attending the wedding? Attending is witnissing, no?

Personally, I would not attend. For each person, that is a decision between them and their Pastor.

 

[recidite_plbs]

I don’t believe that anyone has said that the couple must live by the beliefs of the OP, only that the OP must. I don’t see how living out my Catholic beliefs in what I do or don’t do, in any way imposes those beliefs on anyone else?

If the couple were Catholics as is the OP, and they were trying to defraud the RCC by keeping quiet a previous marriage in order to marry in the church, I could understand it.

The fact is, neither the bride nor groom are Catholic and do not share the beliefs of the OP. If their conscience guides them towards marriage then it is not a matter of conscience for the the OP as he is not actively making that decision for them. They would marry with or without the assent of the OP.

Let’s put it this way. One of my best friends is Jewish (I know in the eyes of the SSPX that even talking to a perfidious Jew puts my soul in danger because the Jew wants nothing more than to have me cast in Hell blah blah). The Jewish tradition allows divorce. He is divorced and I was an usher at his second wedding. Should I have refused because the interpretation of the laws of marriage differ between the RCC and the Jewish faith? My answer is, of course not! If he’d wanted to marry in an Elvis Chapel I’d have still gone because it is his and his wife’s decision and no-one else’s. It isn’t my place to act as judge, jury, and executioner. It shouldn’t be the OP’s either, leave that to the theologians and the clergy.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

If the couple were Catholics as is the OP, and they were trying to defraud the RCC by keeping quiet a previous marriage in order to marry in the church, I could understand it.

The fact is, neither the bride nor groom are Catholic and do not share the beliefs of the OP. If their conscience guides them towards marriage then it is not a matter of conscience for the the OP as he is not actively making that decision for them. They would marry with or without the assent of the OP.

Let’s put it this way. One of my best friends is Jewish (I know in the eyes of the SSPX that even talking to a perfidious Jew puts my soul in danger because the Jew wants nothing more than to have me cast in Hell blah blah). The Jewish tradition allows divorce. He is divorced and I was an usher at his second wedding. Should I have refused because the interpretation of the laws of marriage differ between the RCC and the Jewish faith? My answer is, of course not! If he’d wanted to marry in an Elvis Chapel I’d have still gone because it is his and his wife’s decision and no-one else’s. It isn’t my place to act as judge, jury, and executioner. It shouldn’t be the OP’s either, leave that to the theologians and the clergy.

A Christian (any Baptized person) has a moral obligation not to intentionally participate in the sin of another. Divorce and re-marriage violates Christ’s law which applies to ALL people, everywhere. (it’s not the Catholic Churches law)