Catholic wanting to marry a non catholic divorced man

[samsy]

Help! I need some straight answer on this point: is it possible for a Catholic to marry a non- catholic divorced man without an annulment? the Non- catholic belongs to the Baptist church which ‘dedicates’ rather than ‘baptizes’ its followers. His first marriage is to a non- believer in a civil ceremony. Does a Catholic in this case have the right to invoke the ‘Pauline Privilege’ or does the non- catholic has to go through an annulment to be able to marry the Catholic. Thank you all.

 

[Kelfa28]

As I’m aware, yes.

This is because the Church recognizes marriages between non-catholics as valid, regardless of how or who married them.

 

[samsy]

thank you Kelfa

 

[Steveabrous]

Yes you must get an annulment. My wife was a divorced protestant christian. We married in her church and I was not allowed communion until her annulment went through. I would like to add that the annulment process is difficult with non-catholics. Not on our end, but because they don’t understand it and are reluctant to do the work necessary. We got her annulment based on the fact that her previous husband had not been baptised (the Pauline rule you mentioned earlier)> You must realize as a catholic this is a matter for the church to decide and not you, even when the situation is clear like yours is, mine was. It still took 3 years. Mainly because the traditional route, which is getting statements from wittnesses was just not working. So my priest and I took another route. Usually annulments take 6 months to a year. Mine was a rare case but it was so because of the reluctants of non-catholics to cooperate with the church. After all they are called Protestants for a reason.

 

[samsy]

Thank you Steveabrous, what you have just said is a lot clearer to me now.
.

 

[ValPal]

Help! I need some straight answer on this point: is it possible for a Catholic to marry a non- catholic divorced man without an annulment?

Possibly. This could be done by marriage dissolution IF one or both of the parties are not VALIDLY baptized, and the marriage is considered valid (both parties not Catholic, one of the spouses is Catholic but married with proper dispensation, etc.). It could also be done if the marriage was not consummated, but I’d guess that isn’t the issue here.

the Non- catholic belongs to the Baptist church which ‘dedicates’ rather than ‘baptizes’ its followers.

This baptismal status of the spouses will have to be discussed with you pastor to determine how to proceed.

His first marriage is to a non- believer in a civil ceremony.

The Church assumes civil marriages of non-Catholics (or civil marriages involving Catholics with proper dispensation) valid.

Does a Catholic in this case have the right to invoke the ‘Pauline Privilege’ or does the non- catholic has to go through an annulment to be able to marry the Catholic.

Specific details matter. You need to speak to your pastor to determine how to proceed.

 

[Gorgias]

Help! I need some straight answer on this point: is it possible for a Catholic to marry a non- catholic divorced man without an annulment? the Non- catholic belongs to the Baptist church which ‘dedicates’ rather than ‘baptizes’ its followers. His first marriage is to a non- believer in a civil ceremony. Does a Catholic in this case have the right to invoke the ‘Pauline Privilege’ or does the non- catholic has to go through an annulment to be able to marry the Catholic. Thank you all.

Since the first marriage was between a Christian and a non-believer, the Pauline Privilege doesn’t apply (it refers to the dissolution of a natural marriage between two non-believers, one of whom later decides to be baptized). The Petrine Privilege (‘in favor of the faith’) is the one that may apply here.

Baptist baptisms are seen as valid by the Catholic Church, by the way, (as long as the baptism was with water and the words “I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”) so the man is seen as a baptized Christian by the Church.

Since the marriage was seemingly valid, an annulment would be necessary in this case, before the Catholic woman could marry the divorced Baptist man. Talk to your parish priest and ask his help in this matter…!

 

[1ke]

Help! I need some straight answer on this point: is it possible for a Catholic to marry a non- catholic divorced man without an annulment? the Non- catholic belongs to the Baptist church which ‘dedicates’ rather than ‘baptizes’ its followers. His first marriage is to a non- believer in a civil ceremony. Does a Catholic in this case have the right to invoke the ‘Pauline Privilege’ or does the non- catholic has to go through an annulment to be able to marry the Catholic. Thank you all.

Before you can marry anyone, you both must go through a premarial investigation and be declared free to marry and attend the Churhc’s premarital preparation program.

Whether his freedom to marry is determined (if it is determined) via a full tribunal nullity case or by dissolution of the bond through the Pauline or Petrine Privilege will depend on the specifics.

To invoke the Pauline Privilege, it would need to be proven that they were both unbaptized at the time of the marriage and he would need to receive baptism. Is he wanting to become a Catholic or be baptized in a non-Catholic ecclesial community?

See:

toledodiocese.org/index.php/tribunal/pauline-privilege-

diocs.org/Portals/1/Documents/Tribunal/Decision_matrix.pdf

You and he need to sit down with your priest before you make ANY marriage plans.

 

[Gorgias]

To invoke the Pauline Privilege, it would need to be proven that they were both unbaptized at the time of the marriage and he would need to receive baptism. Is he wanting to become a Catholic or be baptized in a non-Catholic ecclesial community?

1ke,

Are there Baptist baptisms that are not seen as valid by the Church?

 

[1ke]

1ke,

Are there Baptist baptisms that are not seen as valid by the Church?

Yes, they are.

The OP said he is not baptized. Not everyone who attends a Christian ecclesial community and calls themselves Christian is baptized. In fact a surprising number are not. That is because they see it as symbolic not necessary. So, many never receive baptism.

If he only received baby dedication (which is NOT) baptism, and then never went forward for baptism himself as an adult, it is quite possible he is not baptized.

Whether or not he is baptized is a fact for the premarital investigation to verify.

 

[Steveabrous]

The route I ended up taking was to prove that my wife’s ex-husband hadn’t been baptised. That was enough for the church to grant the annulment(My wife had been baptised). This was easier for us since all we had to do was get a written statement from the Pastor of the church her ex-husband grew up in stating he had not been baptised ( Pastors of a church are more willing to work with the Catholic church). This process is handled in Rome, not at the diocesis level like a traditional annulment, and does take a little longer (forgive my spelling)

 

[samsy]

I might end up the route that you have taken Steveabrous, but it has been an eye opener to me on so many levels regarding the complexity of the case and will take on board the suggestions and advise given by others .1Ke, thank you for clarifying the Baptism aspect, I will take that on board when i speak to my priest.

 

[1ke]

The route I ended up taking was to prove that my wife’s ex-husband hadn’t been baptised. That was enough for the church to grant the annulment(My wife had been baptised). This was easier for us since all we had to do was get a written statement from the Pastor of the church her ex-husband grew up in stating he had not been baptised ( Pastors of a church are more willing to work with the Catholic church). This process is handled in Rome, not at the diocesis level like a traditional annulment, and does take a little longer (forgive my spelling)

This is not a decree of nullity. It is a dissolution of the natural bond via the Petrine Privilege.

 

[Steveabrous]

This is not a decree of nullity. It is a dissolution of the natural bond via the Petrine Privilege.

Sorry, thanks for the clarity. I wasn’t aware there is a difference

 

[1ke]

This is not a decree of nullity. It is a dissolution of the natural bond via the Petrine Privilege.

Sorry, thanks for the clarity. I wasn’t aware there is a difference

A decree of nullity is a finding that a valid marriage never took place. Dissolution of the bond dissolves a real, valid marriage.

The dissolution of the bond can be done because natural marriages (those involving the unbaptized) do not have the same indissoluble character as those between the baptizd. Valid marriages between the baptized (valid sacramental marriages) are indissoluble until death.