Marriage, Divorce, and Baptized Non-Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter normbetland
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the problem I find with contemporary Christianity and unfortunately it is seeping into Catholic minds as well. Sin is not relative. There isn’t a such thing as Catholic marriage, and Baptist marriage is different than that and Lutheran from that and Methodist from that. Christ taught definitively on marriage. Marriage is what it is, even if a group of Christians decide not to be obedient to Christ in that regard. The bottom line is that I don’t even HAVE to mention anything uniquely Catholic or outside of Scripture to show that Christian marriage is indissoluble.

Another church may permit sin, but that doesn’t mean that it is no longer sin, and I believe that we do a disservice to the soul if we don’t at least admonish the sinner.

My brothers, if anyone among you should stray from the truth and someone bring him back,
he should know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. -James 5:19-20
 
This is the problem I find with contemporary Christianity and unfortunately it is seeping into Catholic minds as well. Sin is not relative.
Grave matter is not relative. Mortal sin is predicated on three things, not on grave matter only.

But that is not the question you asked. You asked whether it would be “wise” to attempt to dissuade your father from dating.

You were given some good feedback regarding the Church’s teaching on fraternal correction. Fraternal correction is NOT obligatory in the majority of situations, in fact it can be harmful in some. Fraternal correction becomes necessary when we can meet criteria laid out for us by the Church.

For a good treatment of fraternal correction, go here:

newadvent.org/cathen/04394a.htm
 
Sin is sin regardless of whether one believes it is sin or not, morality is not relative. And this just proves my point:

you believe that causing ill will is a greater wrong than letting someone live in sin. This is your conception of a sin/wrong. And yet, you are telling me that it is correct, and that my conception of a sin/wrong, is incorrect.

I’m not saying I’m upset that you have a differing opinion and are telling me that you believe I’m wrong, it’s just interesting that in order to do so, you have to contradict the very thing you are telling me.
This is the problem I find with contemporary Christianity and unfortunately it is seeping into Catholic minds as well. Sin is not relative. There isn’t a such thing as Catholic marriage, and Baptist marriage is different than that and Lutheran from that and Methodist from that. Christ taught definitively on marriage. Marriage is what it is, even if a group of Christians decide not to be obedient to Christ in that regard. The bottom line is that I don’t even HAVE to mention anything uniquely Catholic or outside of Scripture to show that Christian marriage is indissoluble.

Another church may permit sin, but that doesn’t mean that it is no longer sin, and I believe that we do a disservice to the soul if we don’t at least admonish the sinner.

My brothers, if anyone among you should stray from the truth and someone bring him back,
he should know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. -James 5:19-20
You are absolutely right, sin is sin. We aren’t suggesting that there are grades of sin, or that one sin is worse than another. You can certainly discuss the indissolubility of marriage with your father, and you can certainly let him know you disapprove of his relationship.

The thing you don’t know is the status of is her previous marriage, for all you know it could be invalid, and just lacks a declaration from a tribunal.

I don’t believe I have said you were wrong to mention this to your father, just to use caution and that you may not get the reaction you hope for.
 
Sin is sin regardless of whether one believes it is sin or not, morality is not relative.
Very true.

Fortunately for all of us, the Church teaches there is a distinction between what is objectively sinful and the culpability for for that sin.
 
Sin is sin regardless of whether one believes it is sin or not…
I agree with you that “sin is sin.” My issue is with how you are defining what “offenses” qualify as sinful. Your church would view a marriage to his girlfriend as sinful. His church would be OK with it. What makes your church right and his church wrong? (Or, what makes his church right and your church wrong?) There’s really no way to know who is right and who is wrong. All we can do is live our lives according to what we believe to be right.
you believe that causing ill will is a greater wrong than letting someone live in sin. This is your conception of a sin/wrong. And yet, you are telling me that it is correct, and that my conception of a sin/wrong, is incorrect.
I don’t believe I said that. At least I didn’t mean to. Actually, I’m not taking a position on the sinfulness of either belief. I am simply saying that your father probably wouldn’t appreciate being lectured by his daughter about what you consider to be sinful behavior when his church teaches that it is not sinful. That’s all I’m saying. You came here asking for opinions. I gave mine. If it does’t resonate with you, feel free to ignore it.
I’m not saying I’m upset that you have a differing opinion and are telling me that you believe I’m wrong, it’s just interesting that in order to do so, you have to contradict the very thing you are telling me
.

Mmmmm, don’t think so.
 
Another church may permit sin, but that doesn’t mean that it is no longer sin, and I believe that we do a disservice to the soul if we don’t at least admonish the sinner.
Great. Just don’t be surprised it you get admonished right back.
 
I agree with you that “sin is sin.” My issue is with how you are defining what “offenses” qualify as sinful. Your church would view a marriage to his girlfriend as sinful. His church would be OK with it. What makes your church right and his church wrong?
The authority of Jesus Christ, given to his Apostles, and through them, to the Catholic Church in communion with St. Peter’s Successor, the Bishop of Rome.
(Or, what makes his church right and your church wrong?) There’s really no way to know who is right and who is wrong. All we can do is live our lives according to what we believe to be right.
Actually, it’s very easy to figure out who has authority, and who does not, by looking at where the authority came from. If it is self-invented, then it isn’t from Christ.
 
I guess I’m getting confused by the differences here between canon and moral law. I was under the impression that Catholic teaching is that validly conferred marriages between baptized persons were sacramental regardless of whether or not they are Catholic. This seems to be doctrinal, not canonical. I was also under the impression that adultery was a moral, not a canonical law.
I understand what people are saying about treading lightly due to the familial relationship and the “younger” correcting a “superior”. I definitely don’t want to create a giant rift in the family. What I don’t understand is why people are saying that if my father has no interest in becoming Catholic that that is reason enough to let him engage in sin without saying something. If Catholics never admonished a sinner unless they had already decided to investigate Catholicism there wouldn’t be much of a Church. Can someone explain this to me?
My second question would be: regardless of whether I end up sharing my concerns or not, if the day were to come where he would choose to enter into a “marriage” with this woman (assuming the probability that her previous marriage is valid) what is my role as a witness to Christ and the truth of marriage? Do I go to the wedding pretending that this is ok? Do I not go to the wedding and let my reasons be made known? I have thoughts on what those answers should be when I draw the analogy between a similar situation being a gay family member “marrying” a person of the same-sex.
  1. Canon law operates from the standpoint of jurisprudence, not conscience (compare canon 915 with 916, for an example highlighting this). Furthermore, it exists to lead the faithful to virtue, it is not virtue in itself. In any event, the issue is not merely whether it is a sacramental marriage but whether it is a marriage period.
  2. The principles I listed in my previous post are what are necessary (all of them together) for a grave obligation to attempt fraternal correction. The deeper principles lie in charity and prudence. “Could I possibly still love this person though I don’t correct him?” “Will me attempting to correct this person accomplish the goal of helping him or possibly make it worse overall, for either of us?”
  3. The issue at hand here is scandal, which is not “offending sensibilities,” but is rather leading people into sin by giving them occasion through temptation or imitation without sufficiently grave reason (generally dealing with life, justice, and doctrine, depending on how grave a scandal is given). I can almost personally guarantee that you will be one of exactly one people at the wedding with this issue on your mind. No scandal will be given by going. More scandal would probably be given, in fact, by not going (gossip, backbiting, anger, etc.). Going does not mean you love adultery, it means you love your father. If you were a cleric, that would be different… Life, justice, doctrine. Then it becomes an issue of people being led into error about the Church, which obscures the truth and leads to the wide path, etc. It would require a much more careful consideration.
Does this help?
 
The authority of Jesus Christ, given to his Apostles, and through them, to the Catholic Church in communion with St. Peter’s Successor, the Bishop of Rome.
The OP’s non-Catholic father in not likely to be impressed by this argument.
 
This is a personal question. I’m a convert to the Catholic Church, and other than my sister (who converted after I did) and I, the rest of my family consists of baptized non-Catholics.

My mother died almost two years ago, and now my father has started dating. I’ve resisted learning too much about this relationship and the woman he is dating because this is the time of year when my mom died, and I’m still working through some of the stages of grief.

So this is my question. My dad is baptized and not Catholic, and I’m going to go out on a limb and make a safe assumption that his new girlfriend is also baptized, and probably Lutheran (just a classic Minnesota stereotype that probably holds true). I know that she has been married at least once before and is now divorced. What would be the Catholic view of this situation?

Am I correct in saying that the Church teaches that if she is baptized and her husband was baptized, that even though they are not Catholic they still would have entered a Sacramental marriage? And if so, without a decree of nullity, the Catholic view would be that the marriage was and is valid until such a decree were to be obtained?

Would it be wise to advise my father against dating a woman who in the eyes of the Church and of God is still married, then, even though he is not a Catholic Christian?

Looking for clarification on any details I might be misunderstanding and any suggestions of what I should do.
I don’t think you have any misunderstandings of what the Church teaches about marriage.

On the other hand, by your own comment, it appears that you know very little about the woman you father is dating, and even less about her ex husband.

And in essence, you are asking a question, or perhaps several questions, concerning the first marriage of this woman.

Just for the sake of “what if”, I will propose something: depending on her age, her background, education, and religious training, it is not at all out of the realm of possibilities that she may have been originally in a marriage which had one or more impediments on the day of that marriage; for example, either she or her then husband, or both of them may not have accepted that marriage is permanent. And if they did not believe that marriage is permanent, that in itself could be sufficient to render the marriage invalid.

But you don’t know any of the circumstances.

And assuming for the moment that there was an impediment on the day of the marriage which rendered it invalid, then it would take a moral theologian to sort out what would/could/should happen next, after a divorce, as it is likely neither she nor her first husband would ever have a forum which could sort that out and provide a decree of nullity.

It would be my suggestion first, that this is not a question which could be answered by anyone, or hardly anyone, in this forum. So a starting place might be for you to meet, in confidence, with your father’s pastor/minister and ask them how they would deal with the question of the validity of her first marriage, in light of the Gospel command.

And depending on how they answer that question, my second suggestion would be that you speak with your pastor concerning the issue of the possibility that this woman may have had an invalid marriage, with no real way of knowing whether it was or was not, and how you should proceed.

And in any event, I would suggest that you very carefully read, and then re-read, the commentary on the when and where and how of any fraternal correction. I don’t know what type of relationship you have with your father, nor how he might react to you as a Catholic think he should proceed. Were he converting or considering converting, that might be a different answer, but at its bottom line, a whole lot of the matter may be in both what your relationship is with your father, and additionally, how much you may be in the same path as many adult children, who deep down inside do not want their parent to remarry - anyone. I have witnessed that last matter too many times to think it is an isolated incident. And I have no way of determining if it may be something which impacts you.

There are questions which may have one answer in Canon law; and another in moral law, without contradicting one another.
 
You are correct and good to think of his soul. To ignore informing someone of the truth could be a graver sin than the sin itself. We are given great faith in the sacraments and with great faith comes great responsibility to uphold the teachings of God. Please remember that it may prove to be conflicting that the Bible says happens sometimes. However, the right preparation can really make a huge impact.
  1. Pray about this
  2. Be humble and loving (don’t get agitated or sucked into an argument)
  3. To avoid confrontation teach them what the Bible says about marriage and adultery…only quote the Bible so that it is not your opinion but God’s teaching (thus not for argument…encourage to pray over the scripture)
  4. You may offer advice as to what people do in our Church as a positive example
  5. Ultimately, it is not our responsibility or place to tell them what God’s plan is for them but profess the teachings and to encourage them to ask God about what they should do.
God bless!
 
Just for the sake of “what if”, I will propose something: depending on her age, her background, education, and religious training, it is not at all out of the realm of possibilities that she may have been originally in a marriage which had one or more impediments on the day of that marriage; for example, either she or her then husband, or both of them may not have accepted that marriage is permanent. And if they did not believe that marriage is permanent, that in itself could be sufficient to render the marriage invalid.
That doesn’t make a lick of difference unless someone actually pursues a declaration of nullity. Absent such a declaration, the marriage is putatively valid and nobody can go ahead with an attempt at marriage while still in a putatively valid first marriage.
 
That doesn’t make a lick of difference unless someone actually pursues a declaration of nullity. Absent such a declaration, the marriage is putatively valid and nobody can go ahead with an attempt at marriage while still in a putatively valid first marriage.
You missed the entire point, but that’s okay, as I was directing it to the OP.
 
That doesn’t make a lick of difference unless someone actually pursues a declaration of nullity. Absent such a declaration, the marriage is putatively valid and nobody can go ahead with an attempt at marriage while still in a putatively valid first marriage.
I agree with this, and I disagree that a marriage can be thought “not valid” by anyone on earth besides a Catholic Tribunal judge, after the required investigation. If they have not so declared, then the marriage is valid, full stop. If it will never be investigated then it will remain forever valid.
 
I agree with this, and I disagree that a marriage can be thought “not valid” by anyone on earth besides a Catholic Tribunal judge, after the required investigation. If they have not so declared, then the marriage is valid, full stop. If it will never be investigated then it will remain forever valid.
I believe the correct term is “putatively” valid.

We have a number of people wading into an area in which they have no expertise; and the issue sounds both in law (Canon law) and morality. Perhaps it may be better that the OP be directed to others, rather than faceless contacts on the internet who may not have the expertise to answer the OP’s questions.

The answers which are being given as to the legal status apply to the Catholic Church. As to the Gospel morality, the application in the given situation is not anywhere near as clear as some would seem to posit. None of us know what the father believes, or has been taught, and simply bringing up the Gospel quotation does not begin to address the complexity of the question. And we know even less than that about the woman in question or her prior husband.

In another thread, Don Ruggero cautioned against wading into an issue in which we knew less than all the facts; it is advice is well given.
 
Perhaps if more people took a loving stand to spread the teachings on marriage that Jesus gave us then there might be less remarriage and more reconciliation. But as it is now, there is such falling away from the teaching that divorce and remarriage is rampant in our culture. Fear and doubt and more concern for political correctness is not what we need now regarding the teaching on morality of marriage. The same holds true for abortion. There is so few people speaking out about it in our culture that it has become more acceptable. Too many Catholics have a “To each their own” approach in these moralities. Do not be deceived into ignoring or skirting the issue…that is exactly what the devil wants. Yes standing up for what is right may cause division but that is what Jesus said would happen (and not an excuse to back down but encouragement to stand strong as He did) and if we take a prayerful and loving approach and remember that it is just our job to plan the seed and God will do the growing so that we don’t get sucked into an argument then there is less likely going to be division and there will be more repentance. I pray God will guide our Church to be strong in upholding the truth of the Gospel. In Jesus name, Amen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top