Marriage requirements absolute?

[nodito]

Are all baptized Catholics required to follow the Catholic form of marriage regardless of whether they are aware of the requirements or are even aware that they are baptized Catholic? Suppose, for example, that a child was baptized in the Church and orphaned shortly thereafter. The child is raised by non-Catholic adoptive parents. Thirty years later she attempts marriage in a civil ceremony, not realizing that she is Catholic (and presumably not caring even if she were aware, since she doesn’t identify with the religion). Is it impossible for this woman to marry validly outside of the Church?

 

[lizaanne]

Are all baptized Catholics required to follow the Catholic form of marriage regardless of whether they are aware of the requirements or are even aware that they are baptized Catholic? Suppose, for example, that a child was baptized in the Church and orphaned shortly thereafter. The child is raised by non-Catholic adoptive parents. Thirty years later she attempts marriage in a civil ceremony, not realizing that she is Catholic (and presumably not caring even if she were aware, since she doesn’t identify with the religion). Is it impossible for this woman to marry validly outside of the Church?

Yes - all baptized Catholics are required to marry in the Catholic Church. But in the case you cite above, there is no way she could ever know of her responsibility, so no she would not be held to something that presumably NO ONE would know aside from God. Now ---- if later in life she discovers that she was indeed baptized Catholic, then yes, she is required to ensure that her marriage is valid and do what needs to be done to make it so.

~Liza

 

[Skeptic92]

Are all baptized Catholics required to follow the Catholic form of marriage regardless of whether they are aware of the requirements or are even aware that they are baptized Catholic? Suppose, for example, that a child was baptized in the Church and orphaned shortly thereafter. The child is raised by non-Catholic adoptive parents. Thirty years later she attempts marriage in a civil ceremony, not realizing that she is Catholic (and presumably not caring even if she were aware, since she doesn’t identify with the religion). Is it impossible for this woman to marry validly outside of the Church?

Yes and no, by virtue of her baptism she is required to marry by the Catholic form for it to be valid in the eyes of the Church and God **unless **she receives dispensation by her Ordinary to marry by a different form (which would never be given for a civil ceremony, maybe an Anglican wedding, but never civil).

 

[puzzleannie]

Are all baptized Catholics required to follow the Catholic form of marriage regardless of whether they are aware of the requirements or are even aware that they are baptized Catholic? Suppose, for example, that a child was baptized in the Church and orphaned shortly thereafter. The child is raised by non-Catholic adoptive parents. Thirty years later she attempts marriage in a civil ceremony, not realizing that she is Catholic (and presumably not caring even if she were aware, since she doesn’t identify with the religion). Is it impossible for this woman to marry validly outside of the Church?

No they can be dispensed by the bishop. Each such case as you describe would be handled individually according to the individual circumstance because the person’s canonical status with the Church needs to be determined. The person is considered validly married unless it is proven that she is baptized Catholic and never formally left the Church. Whether the circumstances of her upbringing indicate that is for the canon law tribunal to decide. It does not even arise unless she wishes to join the Church and complete her Christian initiation, or if she divorces and wishes to remarry a Catholic.

 

[Phemie]

Yes and no, by virtue of her baptism she is required to marry by the Catholic form for it to be valid in the eyes of the Church and God **unless **she receives dispensation by her Ordinary to marry by a different form (which would never be given for a civil ceremony, maybe an Anglican wedding, but never civil).

Yes, you can receive a dispensation for a civil wedding. It all depends on why you want a civil wedding. Say a convert is marrying and his/her family hates the Catholic Church. In order to maintain the peace in the family the Bishop may grant permission for a civil wedding.

 

[Love_Divine]

Yes, you can receive a dispensation for a civil wedding. It all depends on why you want a civil wedding. Say a convert is marrying and his/her family hates the Catholic Church. In order to maintain the peace in the family the Bishop may grant permission for a civil wedding.

You can also receivea disparity of cult to permit you to have a civil wedding in the event that your spouse is a non-Christian. The other issue with getting a dispensation or a disparity of cult, is that the Catholic spouse is expected to raise their children in the Catholic faith and have them Baptized. I’m not sure how this would work in the aforementioned scenario.

 

[Just_Lurking]

The 1917 canon law contained an exception to the canonical form of marriage requirement for those baptized Catholics in the situation described in the OP. This exception was removed starting in 1949. Canon Law Digest III (pp. 463-464) explains:
**
Exemption of “ab Acatholicis Nati” Abrogated** (Pius XII, Motu proprio, 1 Aug., 1948) AAS 40-305.

This Motu proprio, entitled “Abrogatur Alterum Comma Paragraphi Secundae Canonis 1099,” is as follows:

The Decree, Ne temere, issued by order of Our Predecessor of happy memory, Pius X, had provided (art. XI) that all persons baptized in the Catholic Church, even if they had afterward fallen away from it, were bound to observe the form of marriage prescribed in the Council of Trent.

However, as regards persons born of non-Catholics and baptized in the Catholic Church, who from infancy had grown up in heresy or schism or infidelity or without any religion, lest their marriages should be null, it was provided in the Code of Canon Law that baptized persons of this class are not bound to observe the canonical form of marriage.

But the experience of thirty years has sufficiently shown that the exemption from observing the canonical form of marriage, which was given to this class of persons baptized in the Catholic Church, has not conduced to the good of souls, and has moreover very frequently multiplied difficulties in the solution of cases; wherefore We have deemed it expedient that this exemption be revoked.

Accordingly, after hearing from the Eminent Fathers of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, We of Our own motion and out of the fullness of Apostolic power, decree and provide that all persons baptized in the Catholic Church are bound to observe the canonical form of marriage; and We therefore abrogate the second clause of paragraph 2 of canon 1099, and order that the words, “item ab acatholicis nati, etsi in Ecclesia catholica baptizati, qui ab infantili aetate in haeresi vel schismate aut infidelitate aut sine ulla religione adoleverunt, quoties cum parte acatholica contraxerint,” be expunged from canon 1099.

And We take this occasion to admonish missionaries and priests to observe most carefully the provisions of canons 750-751.

We therefore order that this Apostolic Letter given of Our own motion be reported in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, and We decree that its provisions shall go into effect from the first day of January, 1949.

All things to the contrary, even such as are worthy of special mention, notwithstanding.

Given from Castel Gandolfo near Rome, the first day of August, Feast of Saint Peter in Chains, in the year nineteen hundred and forty-eight, the tenth of Our Pontificate.

AAS 40-305; Pius XII, Motu proprio, 1 Aug., 1948. Periodica, 37-334 (Creusen) .

 

[jmcrae]

Are all baptized Catholics required to follow the Catholic form of marriage regardless of whether they are aware of the requirements or are even aware that they are baptized Catholic? Suppose, for example, that a child was baptized in the Church and orphaned shortly thereafter. The child is raised by non-Catholic adoptive parents. Thirty years later she attempts marriage in a civil ceremony, not realizing that she is Catholic (and presumably not caring even if she were aware, since she doesn’t identify with the religion). Is it impossible for this woman to marry validly outside of the Church?

Nobody except God would ever know, and we already know that He would not hold her accountable for something she had no way of finding out. (Invincible ignorance.)

Even if at some point in her life she decided to become a Catholic and came into contact with a Catholic parish, it would not occur to anyone to look for her Catholic baptismal certificate, since as far as she knows she was never baptized - nobody on earth would ever even know about it, since she would have been baptized under her birth name, and presumably when she was adopted she would have received an adoptive name, and as far as she would be aware, that would be the only name she had ever been known by, and so even if she thought of looking for a baptismal certificate, she would never find it, since she would have no way of knowing what her birth name was, unless her adoptive parents happened to know it for some reason - usually, though, if you find an orphaned child who cannot yet speak, and the parents and all of the relatives are dead or cannot be located, then the child would simply be adopted with a new name, and any record of baptism would then become untraceable.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Are all baptized Catholics required to follow the Catholic form of marriage regardless of whether they are aware of the requirements or are even aware that they are baptized Catholic? Suppose, for example, that a child was baptized in the Church and orphaned shortly thereafter. The child is raised by non-Catholic adoptive parents. Thirty years later she attempts marriage in a civil ceremony, not realizing that she is Catholic (and presumably not caring even if she were aware, since she doesn’t identify with the religion). Is it impossible for this woman to marry validly outside of the Church?

Well, technically, it depends when she was married. Until recently the 1983 Code stated that if someone had formally defected from the Catholic Church they were no longer bound by canonical form for marriage. If she was married before the change in canon law, then her marriage is considered valid. If she was married after the change then the change applies to her marriage.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

The 1917 canon law contained an exception to the canonical form of marriage requirement for those baptized Catholics in the situation described in the OP. This exception was removed starting in 1949.

1917 Code is no longer in effect. 1983 Code is the law of the land and had the same problem of originally not requiring canonical form in such situations and then a couple of years ago the Holy Father changed it. So we’re back at the question of when the marriage took place and whether the law that was in effect at that time would have required canonical form…

 

[Just_Lurking]

1917 Code is no longer in effect. 1983 Code is the law of the land and had the same problem of originally not requiring canonical form in such situations and then a couple of years ago the Holy Father changed it. So we’re back at the question of when the marriage took place and whether the law that was in effect at that time would have required canonical form…

The 1983 code doesn’t address the situation described in the OP. The 1983 code originally had an exception for “defection from the Catholic Church by a formal act”. However, since someone who does not even know that they are Catholic is incapable of such an act, the relevant time periods are:

• before 1918 → invalid
• from 1918 to 1948 → valid
• after 1949 → invalid

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

The 1983 code doesn’t address the situation described in the OP. The 1983 code originally had an exception for “defection from the Catholic Church by a formal act”. However, since someone who does not even know that they are

Baptism in the Catholic Church makes one Catholic. Formally joining and adhering to another ecclesial community or Church would be considered a formal act of defection. What the individual knows or doesn’t know is immaterial to the canons in question.

Thus under the 1983 code the individual would have a valid marriage since they were baptised Catholic and then joined another Christian community by a formal act. However, after 2009 (i think that’s the year) the Holy Father changed the canon and henceforth anyone baptized Catholic is bound by canon law.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Baptism in the Catholic Church makes one Catholic. Formally joining and adhering to another ecclesial community or Church would be considered a formal act of defection. What the individual knows or doesn’t know is immaterial to the canons in question.

From New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, pp. 1335-1336:

Throughout the 1983 code, the terms formale (formal) and formaliter (formally) consistently denote a juridic act which is both public and intended to effect a change in the ecclesial status of some person or group. Thus, the formal act of defection from the Catholic Church is a juridic act which can be proven in the external forum and whose intended effect is to separate oneself from the Church.

In addition to freedom and deliberation, the validity of a juridic act requires that the person who posits it be qualified to do so (c. 124). The Council for the Interpretation of Legal Texts has ruled that the formal act of defecting from the Catholic Church must “be a strictly personal act and thus the subject who poses it must be naturally and juridically capable.” Consequently, since minors lack the full exercise of their rights (c. 98.2), they are incapable of positing a formal act of defection for themselves, and their parents are incapable of making this act for them. Children who were baptized in the Catholic Church but whose parents subsequently enrolled them in a non-Catholic church may ratify this parental decision when they come of age, but, to do so by a formal act, they would have to be aware of their Catholic baptism (c. 126).

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

From New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, pp. 1335-1336:

Children who were baptized in the Catholic Church but whose parents subsequently enrolled them in a non-Catholic church may ratify this parental decision when they come of age, but, to do so by a formal act, they would have to be aware of their Catholic baptism (c. 126).

Interesting. Thanks for the citation.