Can you baptise someone who is divorced and remarried

[pilchard]

???

 

[Marilena]

i think that person would have to speak with the priest. they’d have to go through RCIA first before any baptism could occur.
As for the divorce, and remarriage, that decision is up to the priest i’d guess. likely an anulment would occur and then a dispensation would be granted and then RCIA. I just don’t know the order of things. Perhaps others here know better than i do.

 

[Marilena]

just a thought, why don’t you ask Father Vincent Serpa here?

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

???

Technically you can, since all that is required is water and an intent to baptise in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The person administering the baptism does not even have to be baptised himself.

However the Church would then have to instantly suspend such a person from membership until the marital situation was regularised. So it would be most unwise to do so, and priests would refuse to be involved, except in cases of imminent danger of death.

 

[Ruthie]

“As for the divorce, and remarriage, that decision is up to the priest i’d guess. likely an anulment would occur and then a dispensation would be granted and then RCIA. I just don’t know the order of things. Perhaps others here know better than i do.”

I know better…

My DH and I went through RCIA last year, and entered the Church on Divine Mercy Sunday. I had been married once before, and divorced.

We have been living “as brother and sister.” Because of that, we are not “living in sin,” and can receive the Eucharist. Other couples in similar situations could not bring themselves to abstain, and they could not receive.

I have a hard time understanding their inability to abstain. I want to be with my DH in eternity, and if that means denying myself for a while it’s well worth it.

My teenage mistake was finally judged to be a teenage mistake and not a marriage. We did the compatibility interview last Sunday, and will have our marriage blessed, and will renew our vows on our 10th anniversary, on Feb. 22! :clapping: :dancing:

 

[pilchard]

Congratulations Ruthie - fantastic news - may God Bless you both for your fidelity and obedience

I guess my question is - did the people who weren’t yet prepared to abstain receive the sacrament of baptism - but not confirmation and Holy Communion - is that how it worked - or were they not even given baptism?

 

[cialovesyou]

Can you baptise someone who is divorced and remarried?
I dont think you should. I think you should send them to Father, and he can discern the full circumstance such as the validity of the marriage etc.
He has at least some training in this matter, and can refer to the diocese if he is under confusion.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yes, you can and it’s done all the time. A person who is divorced and remarried can be admitted to the Church. If unbaptized, they can be baptized on admittance and that washes away all their sins to date.

Of course, sins committed later are not affected.

That means they must live as sister and brother while awaiting adjudication of their previous marriage.

 

[jmcrae]

Yes, you can and it’s done all the time. A person who is divorced and remarried can be admitted to the Church. If unbaptized, they can be baptized on admittance and that washes away all their sins to date.

Of course, sins committed later are not affected.

That means they must live as sister and brother while awaiting adjudication of their previous marriage.

Actually would they not have to live as neighbors (not in the same house), to avoid the appearance that they are living together?

In our Diocese, if someone needs to go to the Marriage Tribunal, we aren’t even supposed to send them to RCIA Catechesis; they are supposed to stay in Inquiry until the Tribunal makes its ruling. This rule gets broken all the time, though, because everyone assumes that they will “get the annulment” - I asked one RCIA Catechist what he would do for those people if the Tribunal were to rule that the man is still married to his first wife?

He didn’t have an answer; he just said, “Oh, that could never happen.” But it does happen; otherwise, why would we even bother with the Tribunal in the first place?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Actually would they not have to live as neighbors (not in the same house), to avoid the appearance that they are living together?

In our Diocese, if someone needs to go to the Marriage Tribunal, we aren’t even supposed to send them to RCIA Catechesis; they are supposed to stay in Inquiry until the Tribunal makes its ruling. This rule gets broken all the time, though, because everyone assumes that they will “get the annulment” - I asked one RCIA Catechist what he would do for those people if the Tribunal were to rule that the man is still married to his first wife?

He didn’t have an answer; he just said, “Oh, that could never happen.” But it does happen; otherwise, why would we even bother with the Tribunal in the first place?

You bring up some interesting points – I know in this diocese (Little Rock) we don’t go to such lengths with people who are divorced and remarried and seeking to become Catholics. We treat them as we would cradle Catholics who had got divorced and remarried – help them through the Tribunal.

On the other hand, if Pol Pot or some other murderous non-Christian dictator wanted to be baptized, it would not be lawful to withhold baptism, so I would say persons who have never been baptized can be baptized in such a case.

 

[jmcrae]

You bring up some interesting points – I know in this diocese (Little Rock) we don’t go to such lengths with people who are divorced and remarried and seeking to become Catholics. We treat them as we would cradle Catholics who had got divorced and remarried – help them through the Tribunal.

Yes, but in that case, they received their Initiation Sacraments when they were children, and still innocent of anything - and it’s still true that they can’t receive any Sacraments of the Church until their situation gets sorted out, one way or another.

On the other hand, if Pol Pot or some other murderous non-Christian dictator wanted to be baptized, it would not be lawful to withhold baptism, so I would say persons who have never been baptized can be baptized in such a case.

Pol Pot would be required to repent of his sins beforehand, during the RCIA Period of Purification and Enlightenment, and he would have to be resolved never to sin again before he could be baptized as an adult, right?

We don’t baptize drug addicts if they are still doing their drug habit, either, so it’s not like we’re just picking on the divorced/remarried people. Everyone is required to be quit from their sins before they can be baptized as an adult. Nor is it “different” for infants - it’s just that infants don’t have any personal sin, to begin with.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yes, but in that case, they received their Initiation Sacraments when they were children, and still innocent of anything - and it’s still true that they can’t receive any Sacraments of the Church until their situation gets sorted out, one way or another.

Are you sure? Could not a dying person, even if divorced and remarried, receive annointing? Could they not be given absolution?

Pol Pot would be required to repent of his sins beforehand, during the RCIA Period of Purification and Enlightenment, and he would have to be resolved never to sin again before he could be baptized as an adult, right?

Yes, but that doesn’t take more than a few minutes. And while we all resolve never to sin again, the Church realizes we probably will.

We don’t baptize drug addicts if they are still doing their drug habit, either, so it’s not like we’re just picking on the divorced/remarried people. Everyone is required to be quit from their sins before they can be baptized as an adult. Nor is it “different” for infants - it’s just that infants don’t have any personal sin, to begin with.

And what happens to our souls if we refuse baptism, and the person dies?

 

[jmcrae]

Are you sure? Could not a dying person, even if divorced and remarried, receive annointing? Could they not be given absolution?

The death-bed is a whole different situation, since they aren’t going to be continuing in sin after receiving the Sacraments - they’ll be moving on up to Heaven, away from all temptation.

But for the living, no, they can’t receive the Absolution or any of the other Sacraments until after the Tribunal has made its ruling, and they have taken the appropriate next steps, whatever those may turn out to be.

And what happens to our souls if we refuse baptism, and the person dies?

We aren’t “refusing Baptism” - we are discerning that they aren’t yet spiritually prepared to receive it.

If they die unexpectedly, they have Baptism of Desire. If they end up in the hospital and it seems as though they are going to die, they can receive the Sacraments at that time (but if they live, they will be excommunicated again until such time as they repent of their sins and amend their lives.)

But we have done our duty in obedience to the Church - nothing bad is going to happen to us. What do you think they did, back in the days when RCIA itself took seven years, and Catechumens were being martyred before baptism?

God didn’t hold the Catechists guilty for not baptizing people before they were ready to live the Christian life, even in times of extreme danger; I’m not sure why He would start now, when there is so much less danger, and plenty of time to get everything sorted out.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The death-bed is a whole different situation, since they aren’t going to be continuing in sin after receiving the Sacraments - they’ll be moving on up to Heaven, away from all temptation.

But for the living, no, they can’t receive the Absolution or any of the other Sacraments until after the Tribunal has made its ruling, and they have taken the appropriate next steps, whatever those may turn out to be.

We aren’t “refusing Baptism” - we are discerning that they aren’t yet spiritually prepared to receive it.

If they die unexpectedly, they have Baptism of Desire. If they end up in the hospital and it seems as though they are going to die, they can receive the Sacraments at that time (but if they live, they will be excommunicated again until such time as they repent of their sins and amend their lives.)

But we have done our duty in obedience to the Church - nothing bad is going to happen to us. What do you think they did, back in the days when RCIA itself took seven years, and Catechumens were being martyred before baptism?

God didn’t hold the Catechists guilty for not baptizing people before they were ready to live the Christian life, even in times of extreme danger; I’m not sure why He would start now, when there is so much less danger, and plenty of time to get everything sorted out.

You may be right – I personally would find it difficult to withhold baptism from anyone, and would prefer to rely on the grace bestowed by the sacrement to help them through the difficulties ahead.