Can a godparent marry his/her godchild?

[Fauken]

Respectfully>opinion>>Why would it be hard, being both of the same Faith and Belief and is that not why we also have Priest to go to for Spiritual advice?

The priest is a third party and an outside source. If I have an issue in my marriage that I want a second opinion on (besides the priest), I’d go to my godparents. I can’t ask my husband about advice in his role as my godparent when I’m having an issue with him, can I?

Respectfiully>>It would be harder for a married couple,if one was married to atheist, the other spouse was a believer in the church, would it not?

Peace

I would suppose so, but I would not recommend that a Catholic marry a non-Catholic the same as I would not recommend marrying a godparent. They’re both bad ideas in my opinion.

 

[runningdude]

Also, we were both baptized in the Latin Rite, but attend the Divine Liturgy in a Ruthenian church. We both intend to join the Byzantine Rite.

Unless you specifically asked the Ruthenian bishop to transfer, you would both still be considered Roman Rite, and the Eastern canons would not apply to you (you may, of course, continue to freely attend the Divine Liturgy there).

 

[DarkLight]

Yes. They do. A sponsor and a godparent are the same thing. Sponsor is the canonical term. “Godparent” is merely a colloquial term.

Is there a difference between baptism and confirmation here? For example, I do not have a baptismal sponsor, but do have one for confirmation. I would imagine this is not an unusual situation. I’ve only heard “godparent” applied to the baptismal sponsor.

 

[1ke]

Is there a difference between baptism and confirmation here?

The term Godparent is not used anywhere in canon law. The term sponsor is used. It is used for both baptism and confirmation.

As for the code and how it pertains to marriage, I am not a canon lawyer and am not familiar with the Eastern code, so I won’t say yes or no but will make a couple of observations. The grounds are spiritual relationship, spiritual parentage. Both sponsor roles create that relationship. Typically in the Eastern Churches, a person is baptized, confirmed, and communed at the same time— as an infant. That is the norm. Those joining the church as adults are exceptional. But a confirmation sponsor has the same role as a baptismal sponsor.

 

[FrDavid96]

The term Godparent is not used anywhere in canon law. The term sponsor is used. It is used for both baptism and confirmation.

Actually, neither word is in the Code. The Code actually uses “patrinis” which means “little parents.” It’s actually closer to Godparent than the word sponsor.

Sponsor (in Latin sponsus) is the word typically chosen for contemporary English translations of the Code, but it’s not in the Code itself.

For example
Can. 873 — Patrinus unus tantum vel matrina una vel etiam unus et una assumantur.

Can. 892 — Confirmando, quantum id fieri potest, adsit patrinus, cuius est curare ut confirmatus tamquam verus Christi testis se gerat obligationesque eidem sacramento inhaerentes fideliter adimpleat.

 

[1ke]

Thanks! Quite English-centric of me!!!