Catholic marrying a Protestant

[ladybon]

Thanks Phemie, and AMEN!!!

 

[AMDGtoo]

Not only did she provide her Baptismal Certificate, but her fiancee also had to provide his, which he did, even though his was a non-Catholic baptism.

That’s normal. Marriage between two Baptized Christians is a Sacrament. Marriage between a Baptized Christian and a non-Baptized person is a natural marriage. There are different ceremonies and when one of the marriage is non-Baptized, the word “Sacrament” cannot be used. The priest needs to know.

 

[ladybon]

A marriage between 2 baptized Christians is NOT a sacrament, unless those 2 baptized Christians are both Catholic!!!

 

[Phemie]

A marriage between 2 baptized Christians is NOT a sacrament, unless those 2 baptized Christians are both Catholic!!!

Sorry, you’re wrong on that one. The Church teaches that two baptized Christians (trinitarian Baptism) contract a sacramental marriage.

My Catholic marriage to DH, a baptized member of the United Church of Canada is sacramental.

 

[THurifer2]

A marriage between 2 baptized Christians is NOT a sacrament, unless those 2 baptized Christians are both Catholic!!!

As someone who has taken courses in canon law and sacramental theology I assure you that you are INCORRECT in the form of sacramental Marriage…

Perhaps you were gone that day in your “12 years in Catholic Education”

As long as Trinitarian Baptism is present to both parties it can be recognized as a sacramental Marriage.

Your daughters 1st Marriage is NOT immune from a tribunal.

I do question her priorities when you mention they would go elsewhere for marriage if the priest doesn’t “hurry up”

 

[1ke]

A marriage between 2 baptized Christians is NOT a sacrament, unless those 2 baptized Christians are both Catholic!!!

This is inaccurate.

A valid marriage between two baptized persons is a Sacrament. From the Code of Canon Law:

Can. 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.

§2. For this reason, a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament.

 

[rwoehmke]

All I can add is that in my diocese paperwork must be submitted and a written ok received from the diocese before a Catholic with a previous marriage not according to the proper form can schedule a wedding in one of our parishes.

There is also a rule that one must schedule their wedding in church at least six months ahead. Sometimes the rule is not enforced, but not lightly. To set a firm date and arrange for reception hall and invitations before being assured by the priest who will perform the wedding that it is on the schedule is very risky.

 

[1ke]

I have to disagree on this. My mother “fell-in-love” and had one of those “quick” marriages at a local Protestant church. She had never even asked for a dispensation. Anyway, after her civil divorce, she came to her senses and spoke to a priest about returning to her Catholic Faith. They considered the marriage valid since it was between two Baptized Christians and had been performed by a Christian minister. The priest told her to get a “Decree of Nullity”. In my mother’s case, it was not so she could marry again as she wasn’t even dating at the time. (I believe that I was about 12 at the time, and I know that it didn’t take long–she just had to submit her Baptism record and her Marriage certificate to the tribunal, and in a matter of weeks, she had her “Decree of Nullity”. I guess the reason for the speed was because there didn’t have to be a long drawn out investigation–without the “dispensation” noted, the Decree was practically “rubber stamped”.

The documents may have been processed by the Tribunal in the diocese-- administrative procedures vary by diocese-- but if she lacked form then it was not a decree of nullity. The priest may have called it that, and if so that is sloppy on his part.