Just got my RCIA sponsor, but

[poche]

The only problem I would see would be if either you or he were married or had a previous marriage.

 

[ELCore]

You & your sponsor become relatives in the eyes of the Church once you receive initiation into the Church. It’s incest for you & him or even his children and your children to have a martial relationship - not legally, but in the eyes of the Church you’d not be able to marry with him or his family. It’s possible that this has changed within Roman Catholicism and I’m not aware of it. If it’s changed, I’d like to learn when & how.

Spiritual relationship, as you described, was indeed a diriment (permanent) impediment to marriage in the 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 1049). A spiritual relationship was established for a baptized person with the minister of baptism and the sponsors (according to canon 768 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law). The concept of spiritual relationship was eliminated in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and there is now no impediment to marriage arising from baptism. (This Code applies only to the Roman [Latin] Rite.)

Moreover, though I’m not sure, I infer from some of the OP’s remarks that she has already been baptized. If that is the case, even under the 1917 Code of Canon Law, no spiritual relationship would have arisen from sponsorship at Confirmation: spiritual relationship was contracted only by baptism.

Also, though I am not familiar with the 1990 Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Churches, a quick search reveals that it retains the concept of spiritual relationship arising from baptism and it is a diriment impediment to marriage (canon 811). I only bring this up because others have mentioned it above.

 

[BartholomewB]

Not to mention the pseudo-incestuous aspects to it considering that your sponsor is basically your godparent!

Am I guilty of incest? My wife was my sponsor.

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

I infer from some of the OP’s remarks that she has already been baptized. If that is the case,

If her godparents are still alive, shouldn’t they be the ones to administer her additional Sacraments?

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

Spiritual relationship, as you described, was indeed a diriment (permanent) impediment to marriage in the 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 1049). A spiritual relationship was established for a baptized person with the minister of baptism and the sponsors (according to canon 768 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law). The concept of spiritual relationship was eliminated in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and there is now no impediment to marriage arising from baptism. (This Code applies only to the Roman [Latin] Rite.)

Thank you for the references of when that changed…1980s. Relatively brand new in light of a 2,000 yr old Church. Good to know.

So yeah, then perhaps the RCIA leader really is attempting to play matchmaker? Lol, sounds like it could be a good match.

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

Am I guilty of incest? My wife was my sponsor.

Apparently, only if the marriage/sponsoring occurred before 1983 when the Code of Canon Law changed by eliminating that. If it did, you could always to go the Tribunal of your Diocese to see if they can validate your marriage. I would imagine it wouldn’t be a problem to fix now since the Canon Law has changed?

 

[BartholomewB]

Yes, we were married several years earlier than that, but my converson was several years later. In the meantime, the priest who appointed her my sponsor, and who handled my conversion, is now the head of liturgy in the archdiocese …

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

Yes, it was several years earlier than that. So what do we do now? In the meantime, the priest who appointed her my sponsor, and who handled my conversion, is now the head of liturgy in the archdiocese …

You could always to go the Tribunal of your Diocese to see if they can validate your marriage. I would imagine it wouldn’t be a problem to fix now since the Canon Law has since changed in that regard?

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

Also the idea of this being any type of incestuous relationship is complete wrong

You’re right. From 33 to 1982 it would have been incestuous to marry a sponsor, or for children of sponsor/sponsoree to marry, but now it’s not incestuous because this just changed with the new 1983 Code of Canon Law.

Pretty cool if this turns out to be a good match for the O.P.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Imagine you are engaged or married to a Catholic.

Your spouse/romantic other is your sponsor. When you have hard questions, doubts, concerns, you may not even voice them to your sponsor because you do not want to hurt or offend them. If it comes right down to it, and you are not ready to enter the Church, you may go ahead and go through with it out of love for your partner.

For engaged people, what happens if the engagement breaks off? You then have an estranged sponsor, and you lose one of the people who has promised to help you grow in your Faith.

Better to have a 3rd party, someone who will help you find answers to the hard problems, someone who is not kissing you goodnight.

 

[TheLittleLady]

You & your sponsor become relatives in the eyes of the Church once you receive initiation into the Church. It’s incest for you & him or even his children and your children to have a martial relationship - not legally, but in the eyes of the Church you’d not be able to marry with him or his family.

Would you please cite the Canon law that outlines this?

 

[mrsdizzyd]

It’s been mentioned a few times. The canon was abrogated in 1983. Such a prohibition is still in place amongst some of our Eastern brethren.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Yep, sometimes it helps when people have heard something repeated for them to read the actual “rules” and realize that they have been given a misconception.!

 

[Wife.of.Gabriel]

Would you please cite the Canon law that outlines this?

Apparently, the 1983 Code of Canon Law omitted it for the first time in Church history, so it no longer applies to Roman Catholics.

ElCore posted “Spiritual relationship, as you described, was indeed a diriment (permanent) impediment to marriage in the 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 1049). A spiritual relationship was established for a baptized person with the minister of baptism and the sponsors (according to canon 768 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law). The concept of spiritual relationship was eliminated in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and there is now no impediment to marriage arising from baptism. (This Code applies only to the Roman [Latin] Rite.)”

 

[TheLittleLady]

Exactly, it is not the law today.

 

[ELCore]

Apologies to all. I just realized I made a typo in my original reply: my citation of Canon 1049 in the 1917 Code of Canon Law should be to Canon 1079.