Marriages with non-Christians

[rhalie]

I’ve read on here tonight that marriages (now-divorced) between non-Christians are considered marriages in the sense that a Catholic should not date someone in this situation.

I had understood before reading this that since a natural marriage is not a sacramental marriage, that divorce ends it and that person is free to marry in the Catholic church. Am I wrong?

 

[Vico]

I’ve read on here tonight that marriages (now-divorced) between non-Christians are considered marriages in the sense that a Catholic should not date someone in this situation.

I had understood before reading this that since a natural marriage is not a sacramental marriage, that divorce ends it and that person is free to marry in the Catholic church. Am I wrong?

Divorce does not end it. To marry again, the natural marriage requires a ruling of nullity from the marriage tribunal, or a dissolution (such as the Pauline or Petrine privileges).

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

I had understood before reading this that since a natural marriage is not a sacramental marriage, that divorce ends it and that person is free to marry in the Catholic church. Am I wrong?

You still need an annulment, but your chances of receiving one are much better than if you were in a sacramental marriage.

 

[1ke]

I’ve read on here tonight that marriages (now-divorced) between non-Christians are considered marriages in the sense that a Catholic should not date someone in this situation.

I had understood before reading this that since a natural marriage is not a sacramental marriage, that divorce ends it and that person is free to marry in the Catholic church. Am I wrong?

Natural marriages involve the unbaptized, not all non-Catholic marriages are between the unbaptized.
If the non-Catholics in question were both baptized then divorce cannot dissolve their marriage.

In the case of the two parties who are unbaptized, in certain situations yes a new marriage dissolves the old one ((Pauline Privilege). Not the divorce, the new marriage.

In certain cases involving one or both unbaptized parties, the Pope dissolves the natural marriage in favor of the faith (Petrine Privilege).

If you are dating a divorced non-Catholic they are not free to marry unless their prior marriage is examined through the church and they are declared free to marry by a tribunal decree of nullity, or dissolution of the bond as I’ve mentioned above (Pauline or Petrine Privilege). If dating a divorced non Catholic, both of you should talk to your pastor.

 

[1ke]

You still need an annulment, but your chances of receiving one are much better than if you were in a sacramental marriage

This is not accurate on two counts.

First, if one or both parties to the marriage were unbaptized, dissolution of the bond is also an avenue not just a tribunal nullity case.

Second, there isn’t a “better chance” for a decree of nullity simply based on baptismal status. Natural marriages can certainly be valid marriages, and the criteria are the same for nullity.

 

[TheLittleLady]

As long as two people are free to marry, they may marry validly be they non-Catholic Christians, people of any faith, people of no faith, married in a courthouse or on a beach or in a drive-thru Elvis chapel in Vegas. Natural marriage between those who are free to marry is just as valid as a marriage between two Catholics presided over by the Pope.

 

[rhalie]

Wow, you guys really helped! I want to add something then - this person, would first need to at least express an interest in Catholicism to a priest, not just an interest in a dissolution of a marriage, correct?

 

[1ke]

Wow, you guys really helped! I want to add something then - this person, would first need to at least express an interest in Catholicism to a priest, not just an interest in a dissolution of a marriage, correct?

No.

A non Catholic can seek a decree of nullity or dissolution of the bond because they want to become a Catholic or because they want to marry a Catholic.

They do not have to become a Catholic.

 

[rhalie]

Ok that’s confusing because I know that you aren’t supposed to date someone who isn’t free to marry in the Catholic church.

 

[1ke]

Ok that’s confusing because I know that you aren’t supposed to date someone who isn’t free to marry in the Catholic church.

Well things can be complicated in the real world. People often get involved with others who are divorced.

No one should move forward towards marriage unless and until freedom to marry is resolved.

 

[rhalie]

So you’d have to do something wrong to go that route? That could tempt people to do something wrong on purpose.

Anyway, thank you for the help!

 

[1ke]

So you’d have to do something wrong to go that route?

I wouldn’t call it wrong, per se. it would be wrong to be sexually intimate with a person who is not your spouse. It is not wrong, per se, to explore the possibility of a dating relationship if there is reason to believe the other person could be free to marry— for example strong evidence their marriage was invalid or dissolvable.

It’s not ideal to become interested in a person who has been previously married, perhaps imprudent in many cases, but it isn’t prohibited.

 

[rhalie]

Gotcha, thank you

 

[Vico]

Ok that’s confusing because I know that you aren’t supposed to date someone who isn’t free to marry in the Catholic church.

We should not commit adultery, and that includes entertaining the idea of marrying someone that is already married.