Marriage outside catholic church is considered an invalid marriage?

[elts1956]

No, I’m sorry, baptism is not required for a valid marriage.

If both people are baptized and their Church allows a civil marriage then that marriage is considered sacramental and valid by the Catholic Church as is the civil marriage of two non-baptized.

If one or both is unbaptized, the marriage is natural and valid – and that applies to a Catholic married to a non-Baptized in the Catholic Church with all the dispensations and permissions obtained and all the Ts crossed and Is dotted.

Most marriages of non-Catholics are considered valid until proven otherwise.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[elts1956]

No, I’m sorry, baptism is not required for a valid marriage.

If both people are baptized and their Church allows a civil marriage then that marriage is considered sacramental and valid by the Catholic Church as is the civil marriage of two non-baptized.

If one or both is unbaptized, the marriage is natural and valid – and that applies to a Catholic married to a non-Baptized in the Catholic Church with all the dispensations and permissions obtained and all the Ts crossed and Is dotted.

Most marriages of non-Catholics are considered valid until proven otherwise.

Welcome to the internet.

Hi Peter J. Yeah, I goof sometimes too and give a knee jerk response for which I usually turn red in the face and apologize. It is very hard to understand the nuances and meanings behind words in a post on a forum.

 

[meoconn]

Actually, that marriage is NOT presumed VALID. Depending on the bishop, t may not even be submitted to the Tribunal for a ruling. Our bishop only requires that the priest record all the details that would prove lack of form.

Hello, I am new to this forum and came specifically looking for the topic of this thread. I’ve read over the entire discussion and I’m still confused about the use of the word “valid.” If two non-Catholics marry that marriage is considered valid by the CC. Correct?

Then they get divorced and the man wants to marry a Catholic woman. I understand that in order to marry in the CC he must get an annulment. Does that annulment then make his first marriage INvalid?

If two non-Catholics can have a valid marriage, why is it not valid for a Catholic to marry a non-Catholic outside of the church? I understand that the Catholic would not be following church law, but if they divorced, wouldn’t the Catholic still need to get an annulment before remarrying, which means the marriage WAS valid? Sorry to be dense I am just very confused about the word choices and I think it’s a matter of semantics that I’m just not getting. Thank you for your assistance.

 

[Corki]

First of all, welcome to the forums. I agree, the word “valid” can be confusing when discussing marriage. I hope I can help.

Hello, I am new to this forum and came specifically looking for the topic of this thread. I’ve read over the entire discussion and I’m still confused about the use of the word “valid.” If two non-Catholics marry that marriage is considered valid by the CC. Correct?

That’s correct. Two non-Catholics can be married validly.

Then they get divorced and the man wants to marry a Catholic woman. I understand that in order to marry in the CC he must get an annulment. Does that annulment then make his first marriage INvalid?

No, an annulment process looks at the original marriage to determine if a true marriage ever existed. If not, a decree of nullity is issued. This is what they mean when they say an annulment. It doesn’t make the first marriage invalid, it finds that it never was valid.

If two non-Catholics can have a valid marriage, why is it not valid for a Catholic to marry a non-Catholic outside of the church?

For a Catholic to have a valid marriage he/she must follow the law or precept of the Church regarding marriage.

I understand that the Catholic would not be following church law, but if they divorced, wouldn’t the Catholic still need to get an annulment before remarrying, which means the marriage WAS valid?

Again, if you get an anulment you aren’t changing the validity of the marriage. If a Catholic marries outside of the Church and then divorces, he/she can usually get a declaration regarding the marriage without having to go through the whole annulment process. This is called a finding of “defect of form”.

Sorry to be dense I am just very confused about the word choices and I think it’s a matter of semantics that I’m just not getting. Thank you for your assistance.

I hope that helped a little.

 

[meoconn]

Yes, it does. Thank you!

 

[anjoh66]

Yes, it does. Thank you!

To make you more confused there is also the pauline privilege, which means that if two non baptized person was married and one becomes a christian by baptism then the first marriage can be broken if one of them doesnt want to continue the marriage.

It is not only catholics that must be married by the church, a priest said to me, that any baptized person who conducts a marriage outside the church it is not valid. He meant if they marry civil, once you are baptized you must follow the christian rules.

But it doesnt have to be the catholic church can be any church that has a valid baptism. So merely converting to catholisicm doesnt automatically render an anullment or dissolvation of a marriage.

 

[EasterJoy]

I have also been told that as far as the Church is concerned and theory aside, each marriage is valid until found invalid.

My understanding is that the point of these investigations is to find out whether the persons in a putative marriage in which the spouses have resolved not to live together as husband and wife were in fact married, so it can be determined if either one is free to marry in the future (or free to make vows inconsistent with the married state). The Church has no interest making accusations against or in alienating the affections of a man and a woman who are assumed to be married.

For this reason–and this is far as I know, I don’t have some document to support it–the Church does not do investigations (or make declarations of defect) of marriages in which one of the spouses has died, because the investigations are not done to determine the “legitimacy” of children, at least not anymore. The Church also does not do investigations of marriages before there has been a civil divorce, so as not to be unintentionally responsible for any alienation of affection between spouses. Also, I have been told that these investigations are only done at the request of at least one of the spouses.

Is this true?

 

[Phemie]

I have also been told that as far as the Church is concerned and theory aside, each marriage is valid until found invalid.

Not quite. The marriage of a Catholic outside the Church is not presumed valid.

 

[JulianN]

I have also been told that as far as the Church is concerned and theory aside, each marriage is valid until found invalid.

My understanding is that the point of these investigations is to find out whether the persons in a putative marriage in which the spouses have resolved not to live together as husband and wife were in fact married, so it can be determined if either one is free to marry in the future (or free to make vows inconsistent with the married state). The Church has no interest making accusations against or in alienating the affections of a man and a woman who are assumed to be married.

For this reason–and this is far as I know, I don’t have some document to support it–the Church does not do investigations (or make declarations of defect) of marriages in which one of the spouses has died, because the investigations are not done to determine the “legitimacy” of children, at least not anymore. The Church also does not do investigations of marriages before there has been a civil divorce, so as not to be unintentionally responsible for any alienation of affection between spouses. Also, I have been told that these investigations are only done at the request of at least one of the spouses.

Is this true?

Yes.

 

[EasterJoy]

Not quite. The marriage of a Catholic outside the Church is not presumed valid.

But wouldn’t the Church require that it be confirmed that the Catholic who married outside the Church had not formally left the Church before doing so? I don’t mean a full-on annulment investigation.

I only mean that there would not be a second marriage performed until there was a formal finding that the first marriage suffered from defect of form, and that this in turn would never be done until the first marriage had been dissolved by civil divorce.

The Church won’t allow a marriage to be performed when one of the persons entering into it is still civilly married to someone else, isn’t that right? The Church would not make a finding on whether that person was free to marry before that person was officially divorced, would it? Or do I have that wrong? Am I in rhetorical apple & orange country, here?

 

[Phemie]

But wouldn’t the Church require that it be confirmed that the Catholic who married outside the Church had not formally left the Church before doing so? I don’t mean a full-on annulment investigation.

I only mean that there would not be a second marriage performed until there was a formal finding that the first marriage suffered from defect of form, and that this in turn would never be done until the first marriage had been dissolved by civil divorce.

Well, our bishop only requires that the Catholic party present a recent certificate of baptism, proof of marriage outside the Church, proof of divorce. All to be documented by the priest during the pre-nuptial investigation. Those three documents, with no notation of marriage on the baptismal certificate, is a clear indication that the marriage wasn’t valid.

The Church won’t allow a marriage to be performed when one of the persons entering into it is still civilly married to someone else, isn’t that right? The Church would not make a finding on whether that person was free to marry before that person was officially divorced, would it? Or do I have that wrong? Am I in rhetorical apple & orange country, here?

No, the Church wouldn’t marry someone who was legally married to someone else because the Church is also obedient to civil law. OTOH, the Church wouldn’t presume that the marriage of a Catholic outside the Church was valid unless there was proof of dispensation.

 

[EasterJoy]

Originally Posted by EasterJoy
But wouldn’t the Church require that it be confirmed that the Catholic who married outside the Church had not formally left the Church before doing so? I don’t mean a full-on annulment investigation.

I only mean that there would not be a second marriage performed until there was a formal finding that the first marriage suffered from defect of form, and that this in turn would never be done until the first marriage had been dissolved by civil divorce.

Well, our bishop only requires that the Catholic party present a recent certificate of baptism, proof of marriage outside the Church, proof of divorce. All to be documented by the priest during the pre-nuptial investigation. Those three documents, with no notation of marriage on the baptismal certificate, is a clear indication that the marriage wasn’t valid.

The Church won’t allow a marriage to be performed when one of the persons entering into it is still civilly married to someone else, isn’t that right? The Church would not make a finding on whether that person was free to marry before that person was officially divorced, would it? Or do I have that wrong? Am I in rhetorical apple & orange country, here?

No, the Church wouldn’t marry someone who was legally married to someone else because the Church is also obedient to civil law. OTOH, the Church wouldn’t presume that the marriage of a Catholic outside the Church was valid unless there was proof of dispensation.

OK…so the necessity for civil divorce of all previously attempted marriages and the finding on correct form for those marriages are two separate things. I get it.

Thank you!

PS I had no idea there was such a thing as a “recent” certificate of baptism…does this show whether a Catholic has made his or her First Holy Communion or been confirmed, too?

 

[Phemie]

OK…so the necessity for civil divorce of all previously attempted marriages and the finding on correct form for those marriages are two separate things. I get it.

Thank you!

PS I had no idea there was such a thing as a “recent” certificate of baptism…does this show whether a Catholic has made his or her First Holy Communion or been confirmed, too?

Only Confirmation and Marriage. Along with Baptism they are the three sacraments we must register (oh, and Holy Orders too, but we don’t deal with that one too often) and if you celebrate either your confirmation or marriage (and I presumed, are ordained) in a parish other then the one where you were baptized a notification is sent to your baptismal parish and that information is entered in your baptismal record.

When you present to get married the priest will request a recent (usually within 6 months) certificate of baptism, to verify your baptism, yes, but also to verify if there is anything on it to indicate you aren’t free to marry.

 

[EasterJoy]

Only Confirmation and Marriage. Along with Baptism they are the three sacraments we must register (oh, and Holy Orders too, but we don’t deal with that one too often) and if you celebrate either your confirmation or marriage (and I presumed, are ordained) in a parish other then the one where you were baptized a notification is sent to your baptismal parish and that information is entered in your baptismal record.

When you present to get married the priest will request a recent (usually within 6 months) certificate of baptism, to verify your baptism, yes, but also to verify if there is anything on it to indicate you aren’t free to marry.

Thank you! I learned something here today, once again.

 

[puzzleannie]

PS I had no idea there was such a thing as a “recent” certificate of baptism…does this show whether a Catholic has made his or her First Holy Communion or been confirmed, too?

yes, for instance if you are planning to be married (or to enter a religious order or seminary) you must request a new baptismal certificate from the parish where you were baptized. On the form for “notations” your first communion, confirmation, previous marriage (if any) and religious profession (if any) will be noted.

 

[puzzleannie]

PS I had no idea there was such a thing as a “recent” certificate of baptism…does this show whether a Catholic has made his or her First Holy Communion or been confirmed, too?

yes, for instance if you are planning to be married (or to enter a religious order or seminary) you must request a new baptismal certificate from the parish where you were baptized. On the form for “notations” your first communion, confirmation, previous marriage (if any) and religious profession (if any) will be noted.

 

[Rose71]

Another question:

If Person A was married in a Christian wedding ceremony (e.g. Anglican, Methodist etc.) and subsequently obtained a civil divorce…

Person A then wishes to marry Person B, who is a Catholic and has never been married at all. They wish to marry in a Catholic Church and Person A has done his/her research and understands what a Catholic marriage actually means.

1. Am I correct in thinking Person A is still actually married in the eyes of the CC until proved otherwise?
2. Would Person A (The non-Catholic) be able to apply for an annullment from the CC if there was evidence tht his / her former husband / wife never actually appreciated the purpose of a Christian marriage, for example, if he/she was supressing homosexual tendencies, or was very young and felt pressured into a shotgun wedding, or just admitted to never having genuinely believed in any Christian precepts to begin with.
3. I assume this would mean Person A would have to agree to go before a Catholic tribunal. Does it also mean the ex-spouse of Person A would have to be willing to answer the Tribunal’s questions too?
4. Assuming Person A’s first marriage was decreed to be null, are A and B then free to marry in the Catholic Church?

Please answer in very simple sentences - I’m easily confused:thumbsup: thanks!

 

[Phemie]

Another question:

If Person A was married in a Christian wedding ceremony (e.g. Anglican, Methodist etc.) and subsequently obtained a civil divorce…

Person A then wishes to marry Person B, who is a Catholic and has never been married at all. They wish to marry in a Catholic Church and Person A has done his/her research and understands what a Catholic marriage actually means.

1. Am I correct in thinking Person A is still actually married in the eyes of the CC until proved otherwise?

YES, the civil marriage of non-Catholics is presumed valid.

1. Would Person A (The non-Catholic) be able to apply for an annullment from the CC if there was evidence tht his / her former husband / wife never actually appreciated the purpose of a Christian marriage, for example, if he/she was supressing homosexual tendencies, or was very young and felt pressured into a shotgun wedding, or just admitted to never having genuinely believed in any Christian precepts to begin with.

YES, not only be able to, but must do so in order to marry the Catholic.

1. I assume this would mean Person A would have to agree to go before a Catholic tribunal. Does it also mean the ex-spouse of Person A would have to be willing to answer the Tribunal’s questions too?

Most people never deal with the Tribunal directly. They meet with a priest for a lengthy interview, which is usually taped. The documents are sent to the Tribunal for review.

The spouse would be contacted but if he/she didn’t wish to participate that is his/her prerogative and will not stop the review from going ahead.

1. Assuming Person A’s first marriage was decreed to be null, are A and B then free to marry in the Catholic Church?

YES.

Please answer in very simple sentences - I’m easily confused:thumbsup: thanks!

 

[Rose71]

Thank you Phemie I really appreciate you taking the trouble to provide an answer and keeping it clear and to the point:thumbsup:

 

[RB2]

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter J View Post
So in the case of “a Catholic who marries outside the Catholic Church, without their Bishop’s permission”, do those facts constitute proof that the marriage is invalid? Or is “proof” more complicated than that?​

Actually, that marriage is NOT presumed VALID. Depending on the bishop, t may not even be submitted to the Tribunal for a ruling. Our bishop only requires that the priest record all the details that would prove lack of form.

So in the case of a Protestant and Catholic who get married in
either a Protestant or Non-Denominatinal Church. The Protestant
is probably not committing mortal sin by being in the marriage, but
the Catholic person has an invalid marriage and is living in mortal sin.
I think this would be a proper nuance.

Lets say they opted for a civil marriage and married by a non-cleric judge…then perhaps for both they are in an invalid marriage before God and most certainly both in mortal sin.

However, some of this is very hard.
It would seem that I could validly encroach on a marriage between
a Catholic and Protestant that has been blessed with children that wasnt performed by a Catholic priest. In other words I could tempt ,date, and entice a Catholic woman(I am male,single, Catholic) to leave her husband and marry me, where no other problems exist in the marriage. I dont think God or general society approves of this, yet it appears moral within the context of ‘valid marriages’. ??? This is perplexing?