Catholic man marries Episcopal Woman

  • Thread starter Thread starter jduffey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LRThunder said:
I was under the impression a deacon could be the official witness for a Catholic marriage. True the wedding could not be a Mass, but I thought that was what a deacon could do.

If the wedding was a Nuptial Mass, then I’d agree 100% with your post.

Somebody correct me if I’m mistaken.
Click to expand...
Sure, a deacon can be the witness for a Catholic wedding. But deacons need faculties too. The question was whether the wedding could be done at an Old Catholic Church instead of a Catholic Church in union with Rome. It could be and would be valid only if dispensation is given by the Catholic Bishop. Otherwise it would have a “lack of form” problem. I just don’t see a Catholic Bishop giving a dispensation for a wedding to be held in an Old Catholic church by an Old Catholic deacon OR priest. It might happen if the other spouse-to-be happend to be Old Catholic but that isn’t the case with the OP.
 
SIA said:
And when does Rome ever successfully pass it off that they genuinely wish to have dialogue with other churches when they act in such an exclusive condescending manner?
Click to expand...
Eccumenical dialog is, as you point out, the function of Rome. It is not the responsibilty of an individual engaged couple to do that.
 
^^ I believe SIA’s intention was to point out the rudeness of some Catholic posters on this thread.
 
Corki said:
While their Sacraments in general may be valid, marriage is a Sacrament that requires not only validly ordained priests but also that the priest have faculties to perform valid marriages for Catholics, which they don’t. In order for a Catholic to be married in another Church, he/she needs dispensation from the Bishop which would be very doubtful for the Old Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Does this mean that a marriage between a Roman Catholic and an Old Catholic would also be invalid if it were performed in the Roman Catholic Church without permission from the Old Catholic bishop?
 
Corki said:
Sure, a deacon can be the witness for a Catholic wedding. But deacons need faculties too. The question was whether the wedding could be done at an Old Catholic Church instead of a Catholic Church in union with Rome. It could be and would be valid only if dispensation is given by the Catholic Bishop. Otherwise it would have a “lack of form” problem. I just don’t see a Catholic Bishop giving a dispensation for a wedding to be held in an Old Catholic church by an Old Catholic deacon OR priest. It might happen if the other spouse-to-be happend to be Old Catholic but that isn’t the case with the OP.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification.
 
Hesychios said:
If that is all they believe, as marvelous as it is (and a great first step) that is still not sufficient.

They must accept what Holy Orthodoxy teaches, and reject what Holy Orthodoxy rejects. They will need to live as though they truly believe it.

Uniformity of teaching is the one mechanism holding the Orthodox church together. There is no other, and it works fine.

Once we open the communion up to the possibility of alternate claims to truth being equally valid, we undermine the teaching authority of the church. It is like opening Pandora’s box. We will have broken with our predecessors in the Faith and lost our inheritance.

There is only one standard, the received Truth from Jesus Christ through the Apostles. Any teaching that does not satisfy the Vincentian Canon is subsidiary and should not be seriously considered.
Click to expand...
If one is not inside THE box, then one cannot believe what those inside THE box believe. I don’t think so.
 
SIA said:
If one is not inside THE box, then one cannot believe what those inside THE box believe. I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
I believe what Hesychios is saying is more like, if you don’t believe what those in the box believe, you won’t be allowed in the box.
 
Peter_J said:
Does this mean that a marriage between a Roman Catholic and an Old Catholic would also be invalid if it were performed in the Roman Catholic Church without permission from the Old Catholic bishop?
Click to expand...
Not from the Roman Catholic point of view. I don’t know what the Old Catholic norms for marriage are.
 
Peter_J said:
Thanks for the info. Do you have source to back it up?
Click to expand...
Sure do - the code of canon law!
Canon 1109 Within the limits of their territory, the local Ordinary and the parish priest by virtue of their office validly assist at the marriages not only of their subjects, but also of non-subjects, provided one or other of the parties is of the latin rite. They cannot assist if by sentence or decree they have been excommunicated, placed under interdict or suspended from office, or been declared to be such.
Click to expand...
Canon 1059 The marriage of catholics, even if only one party is baptised, is governed not only by divine law but also by canon law, without prejudice to the competence of the civil authority in respect of the merely civil effects of the marriage.
Click to expand...
Canon 1108.1 Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists, in accordance however with the rules set out in the following canons, and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. 144, 1112.1, 1116 and 1127.2-3.
Click to expand...
Canon 1111.2 In order that the delegation of the faculty to assist at marriages be valid, it must be expressly given to specific persons; if there is question of a special delegation, it is to be given for a specific marriage; if however there is question of a general delegation, it is to be given in writing.
Click to expand...
Canon 1115 Marriages are to be celebrated in the parish in which either of the contracting parties has a domicile or a quasi-domicile or a month’s residence or, if there is question of vagi, in the parish in which they are actually residing. With the permission of the proper Ordinary or the proper parish priest, marriages may be celebrated elsewhere.
Click to expand...
 
Corki said:
Sure do - the code of canon law!
Click to expand...
Hey Corki–

What is a novice CSGM? When I see CSGM, I think of Command Sergeant Major and say “Airborne! All The Way!” and then Beat Army! 👍
 
jduffey said:
So, I , a Catholic, was just engaged to my girlfriend, an Episcopal. We are beginning to plan our wedding, wondering how to work out the officiants. We are both dedicated to our faiths and also to each other. We have discussed conversion and know that neither is ready, but might be possibile in the future. For now and for the wedding, she would prefer to marry in an Episcopal church, hoping that we can go through marriage counseling within both churches and have a Catholic priest present to officiate with the Episcopal priest. confusing, I know.

I think this can be done, but a question remains about the order of the liturgies and what can be done for the Liturgy of the Eucharist, how communion happens, catholics and episcopalians present together, etc, etc. Very confusing, and I wanted to have some idea before we went out to talk to both of our churches. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
ahh … there’s barely a difference anyway 😃

Okay – just kidding! However, you’re certainly closer in thought than I would be with a Catholic woman, so it shouldn’t be that tough?

Except for the Pope and the gay Episcopal bishop thing you have most things in common. I went into an Episcopal church one time & if someone blindfolded me & beamed me into the church – I would have thought it was Catholic …

You have the Pope they have the Queen (well I guess you guys have a queen too – Mary). 🙂 🙂 🙂

Best of luck
 
Peter_J said:
I believe what Hesychios is saying is more like, if you don’t believe what those in the box believe, you won’t be allowed in the box.
Click to expand...
Quite so.

We don’t make it up as we go along, this faith is handed to us. If I want the Eucharist I have to accept that.

I came in from outside the box myself. It meant leaving my “comfort zone” but I had to do it.
 
Come on guys I said I was only kidding 🙂

But I’ll make nice … I’m sorry!!!

I still want you guys to fire that gay bishop though? Such heresy must be purged …

urrrrrr

:knight1:
 
sola_scriptura said:
Come on guys I said I was only kidding 🙂

But I’ll make nice … I’m sorry!!!

I still want you guys to fire that gay bishop though? Such heresy must be purged …

urrrrrr

:knight1:
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

Same sex attraction is probably more common than most people realize, or will care to admit.

If someone has this inclination and it is a real problem, there are obviously some life choices that make the temptation greater and harder to beat. Working as a gym coach, for example.

Married individuals sometimes struggle to remain faithful. The marriage vow can be hard on those powerfully attracted to people besides the spouse. It almost doesn’t matter whether this is person is heterosexual or not, if they have an attraction for people outside of their marriage covenant they have a moral obligation to control it.

Living as a solitary, such as the life of a celibate priest, is hard on people whether they are strongly same sex attracted or strongly opposite sex attracted, the temptations are great and it takes a strong will. Any way one looks at it 50 percent of the congregation will be potentially alluring to them. If the man cannot handle it, he needs to step down.

Military personnel, traveling business people and migrant workers all have these problems. Being away a long time inspires great temptations.

So it almost does not matter whether the person is married or not, or whether the person is a priest or not. We all have these struggles, and when we need to deal with them. As Christians we naturally will turn to a Spiritual Director or Pastor for help and guidance.

The problem with this “bishop” is not that, ultimately, he must admit he desires sex with a man. It is one of many types of sin a person could fall prey to and needs to beat. The problem is, he very publicly, with no remorse, gave in to his temptation and wants the diocese and ultimately the world, to say that this is OK. He wants to stand the Judeo-Christian moral code on it’s head and reverse it forever to accommodate his particular sin, just because he gave into his personal brand of weakness. He is not good material for pastoring a church of God.

A church which will not only tolerate this concept, but actively endorse it, is lost.
 
Peter_J said:
I believe what Hesychios is saying is more like, if you don’t believe what those in the box believe, you won’t be allowed in the box.
Click to expand...
This is really off point here I know. The whole point of the Real Presence from the Catholic point of view is absolute Authoritarianism. The RCC says that if one does not believe in transubstantiation then one cannot believe in the Real Presence. This is a very exclusive view of the Real Presence which in my opinion does not square with what Scripture teaches us. If you wish to believe that your priest posesses the ability to change bread and wine into the flesh and blood of Christ that’s perfectly fine with me because ultimately, you are receiving the body blood soul and divinity of Christ in my mind, not because of what your priest does; but because of what Christ does not exclusively for Catholics or Orthodox, but for Christians who believe and follow him. Jesus passed the bread and wine around at the last supper and said that it was his flesh and blood, but remember; he was about to share it with people who didn’t understand him or what he was about to do and one of them was about to give him up to be crucified. This is a very non-exclusive sharing by Christ. I simply do not believe that one must believe in transubstantiation to believe in the real presence of Jesus at communion time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top