Marriage between a baptized Protestant and non-baptized Protestant: Null?

[Ben_Sinner]

Hi,

One of my friends recently got divorced and is wondering if her marriage was null to begin with.

She is non-demoninational and the wedding was a Protestant wedding.

Her husband was baptized, but she never has been baptized yet.

Would that make their marriage null in the eyes of the Catholic Church and give her permission to re-marry?

 

[Vico]

Hi,

One of my friends recently got divorced and is wondering if her marriage was null to begin with.

She is non-demoninational and the wedding was a Protestant wedding.

Her husband was baptized, but she never has been baptized yet.

Would that make their marriage null in the eyes of the Catholic Church and give her permission to re-marry?

It is called a natural marriage which can be dissolved.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

It is called a natural marriage which can be dissolved.

But I don’t think that was the original question. The marriage was between 2 Protestants, neither of whom were governed by Catholic marriage laws. Assuming each was free to marry in the first place, what reason would there be to consider that marriage “null” to begin with? There so often seems to be an undercurrent to these types of questions that only marriages between 2 Catholics are “valid.”

 

[Phemie]

This is basically the same question you asked before except you’ve made them generic baptized and unbaptized.

The Church presumes that any two non-Catholics who get married are validly married unless one of them was married before and the spouse is still living or there was some other impediment such as too close kinship.

So if it was the first marriage for both, they are a man and a woman, and they are not first cousins or bother and sister then they are considered validly married.

 

[thephilosopher6]

It is a natural marriage. And if she was never baptized, she was never Christian in the first place.

 

[1ke]

Hi,

One of my friends recently got divorced and is wondering if her marriage was null to begin with.

She is non-demoninational and the wedding was a Protestant wedding.

Her husband was baptized, but she never has been baptized yet.

Would that make their marriage null in the eyes of the Catholic Church and give her permission to re-marry?

You already asked this.

It is a valid, natural marriage.

It would be presumed valid, unless she could show it was invalid for some reason.

 

[1ke]

But I don’t think that was the original question.

Vico answered the question, it is a valid natural marriage.

The marriage was between 2 Protestants, neither of whom were governed by Catholic marriage laws. Assuming each was free to marry in the first place, what reason would there be to consider that marriage “null” to begin with?

Vico was not referring to nullity. He stated that the natural marriage could be dissolved. This is not the same thing as being declared null. A valid natural marriage can be dissolved via the Petrine (or Pauline if both are unbaptized) Privilege.

There so often seems to be an undercurrent to these types of questions that only marriages between 2 Catholics are “valid.”

A natural marriage can be valid and be dissolved. A sacramental marriage cannot be dissolved, post consummation.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Do you not know that *marriage *pre-dates the Church?

People validly married long before the Church existed, and (all other things being equal) people outside the Church continue to validly marry today.



tee
Neither a Civil nor a Canon Lawyer

 

[Vico]

But I don’t think that was the original question. The marriage was between 2 Protestants, neither of whom were governed by Catholic marriage laws. Assuming each was free to marry in the first place, what reason would there be to consider that marriage “null” to begin with? There so often seems to be an undercurrent to these types of questions that only marriages between 2 Catholics are “valid.”

You mean would only one being baptized make their marriage null in the eyes of the Catholic Church and give her permission to re-marry?

I mean to say it can be dissolved rather than being null.

 

[Ben_Sinner]

Would she have to get it dissolved before she started dating again?

 

[1ke]

Would she have to get it dissolved before she started dating again?

Look Ben, not to be rude, but any person you are asking questions for in random fashion on the internet would be better served by sitting down and talking to a priest. Firstly, because specifics of the relationship matter. And secondly, because you are going to get a lot of answers here that are just plain wrong. It’s the nature of EVERY marriage-related question posed here on CAF. Someone comes along and gives erroneous information, not out of malice but just out of their own current understanding.

Regarding such a person “having to” get the marriage dissolved or declared null (both are avenues) before dating, who is the authority here? You asked your question about two non-Catholics. So, there is no one telling them that they “have to” do this or that. And no one to dissolve the marriage or declare nullity.

If the Catholic Church is involved, when it comes to sacramental marriages it is imprudent to get into relationships before freedom to marry is determined, because if the marriage is found to be valid the person is bound until the death of their spouse. Having someone they’ve formed an attachment to who is not their spouse can cause serious heartache and temptation.

When it comes to natural marriages, the Pauline and Petrine Privilege are both invoked as a favor of the faith in a marriage situation, so logically there would have to be a relationship formed before such privilege could be invoked. But note, Petrine Privilege is not a foregone conclusion. One must petition for it.