Married in Protestant Church

[Agent]

I very much appreciate all of the advice and comments.

I went to reconcilliation last night and explained my situation as well as I could. The priest was very good and helpful. He advised me to refrain from communion and said he hadn’t studied canon law in 8 years and that he would research the issue and get back to me sometime in the next week or so. (I will anonymously call the Church. . .)

I am pleased and content with his response. he seems very willing to help and readily admitted that he couldn’t give me a quick answer. I appreciated his candor.

 

[Heath_Bar]

Agent,
Please do not let some of the rules of the Catholic faith deter you from coming back home. I am a convert to Catholicism from Church of Christ. I met my wife, who was at that time a loosely practicing Catholic, in 1986 and we were married in December of 1988 by a Southern Baptist minister, who is my cousin. We were legally married in every way in the laws of the United States of America, but in the eyes of the Church it wasn't a sacramental marriage. In 1990, after I went through RCIA and was confirmed, we were re-married in a Catholic wedding mass, and it was a very beautiful ceremony. But, if anybody asks us our weddding date, we always answer December, 1988. A proper wedding ceremony in the eyes of the Church does not "override" or somehow replace your original marriage in any way, it simply brings it to the wonderful status of a fully sacramental marriage in the Catholic Church. I know it can be frustrating and time-consuming to follow the rules, but the benefits of full communion with the Church far outweigh the momentary hassles. Rest assured, the Church does want you back, and I pray that Christ will bless you with every available blessing as you continue the jouney home. Keep up the spirit!:thumbsup:

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Agent,

Please do not let some of the rules of the Catholic faith deter you from coming back home. I am a convert to Catholicism from Church of Christ. I met my wife, who was at that time a loosely practicing Catholic, in 1986 and we were married in December of 1988 by a Southern Baptist minister, who is my cousin. We were legally married in every way in the laws of the United States of America, but in the eyes of the Church it wasn’t a sacramental marriage. In 1990, after I went through RCIA and was confirmed, we were re-married in a Catholic wedding mass, and it was a very beautiful ceremony. But, if anybody asks us our weddding date, we always answer December, 1988. A proper wedding ceremony in the eyes of the Church does not “override” or somehow replace your original marriage in any way, it simply brings it to the wonderful status of a fully sacramental marriage in the Catholic Church. I know it can be frustrating and time-consuming to follow the rules, but the benefits of full communion with the Church far outweigh the momentary hassles. Rest assured, the Church does want you back, and I pray that Christ will bless you with every available blessing as you continue the jouney home. Keep up the spirit!

This statement is incorrect. “A proper wedding ceremony in the eyes of the Church does not “override” or somehow replace your original marriage in any way, it simply brings it to the wonderful status of a fully sacramental marriage in the Catholic Church.”

It does in fact celebrate a new Marriage in many instances and the wedding date is not retroactive. In some instances the original wedding date remains intact. If a new exchange of vows is required, the Marriage takes place at that point.

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

I very much appreciate all of the advice and comments.

I went to reconcilliation last night and explained my situation as well as I could. The priest was very good and helpful. He advised me to refrain from communion and said he hadn’t studied canon law in 8 years and that he would research the issue and get back to me sometime in the next week or so. (I will anonymously call the Church. . .)

I am pleased and content with his response. he seems very willing to help and readily admitted that he couldn’t give me a quick answer. I appreciated his candor.

I think you found a keeper of a priest! All those prayers from CAF worked.

 

[catholiconce]

I was baptized and confirmed. My wife is protestant. This is our only marriage. We have been married 6 years. We were married in front of a minister and we both believe we were truly married in God’s eyes.

I want to be fully accepted into the Catholic Church. I have been hearing contradictory things about “blessing” the marriage; having the marriage “convalidated”, “renewing our vows”. I have a bad feeling the priests who I have been talking with do not know what they are talking about.

My wife and I both believe we were married correctly by the protestant minister; that is, we both gave full consent. I do not want to have to state anywhere on record that my marriage was invalid. I accept it is not sacramental per se, but I refuse to state it is not a real, valid marriage. I do not want to have 2 marriage dates, one Catholic and one legal.

Deep down I want to return to the Catholic faith completely but I am having a hard time doing so. My understanding is that convalidation would mean that we were not really married.

Please help and please do not advise me to speak with a priest because I have spoken with 3 different priests and I believe they know less about canon law than I do.

What about radical sanation?

You are married in the eyes of God. GOD is the judge not the Roman Catholic Church.
How are mariages in other christian churches any less valid to God? They are not they maybe less valid to The Roman Catholic Church. However they are not the last word on everthing God is. I have news for you God loves all people not just the Romans Catholics.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

How are mariages in other christian churches any less valid to God? They are not they maybe less valid to The Roman Catholic Church. However they are not the last word on everthing God is. I have news for you God loves all people not just the Romans Catholics.

Marriages in other Christian communities are valid for the members of those communities. But Catholics have to marry within the laws of the Catholic Church.

Non-Catholics are sometimes surprised to find out just how strongly the Catholic Church views their marriages as valid. If a non-Catholic divorces, then wishes to marry a Catholic, they learn that the Church still considers them married. Unless their marriage is investigated and found to be invalid, they can’t get married because they are already married.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

You are married in the eyes of God. GOD is the judge not the Roman Catholic Church.
How are mariages in other christian churches any less valid to God? They are not they maybe less valid to The Roman Catholic Church. However they are not the last word on everthing God is. I have news for you God loves all people not just the Romans Catholics.

You forgot the part about “He who hears you, hears Me.” and also the part about “What you bind on earth , will be bound in Heaven…” The Catholic Church has been entrusted with the care and administration of the Sacraments. She alone determines how Christians, specifically Catholics celebrate them.

 

[catholiconce]

You forgot the part about “He who hears you, hears Me.” and also the part about “What you bind on earth , will be bound in Heaven…” The Catholic Church has been entrusted with the care and administration of the Sacraments. She alone determines how Christians, specifically Catholics celebrate them./QUOTE You do not have to Be RC to have a valid mariage in the eyes of God. Where in scripture does The RC claim this ? (Chapter and verse please)

 

[catholiconce]

You forgot the part about “He who hears you, hears Me.” and also the part about “What you bind on earth , will be bound in Heaven…” The Catholic Church has been entrusted with the care and administration of the Sacraments. She alone determines how Christians, specifically Catholics celebrate them.

You do not have to be RC to have a valid mariage in the eyes of God!!! Where in scripture does the RC claim only The RC defines mariage(chapter and verse)

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

You do not have to be RC to have a valid mariage in the eyes of God!!! Where in scripture does the RC claim only The RC defines mariage(chapter and verse)

Is “the RC” anything like “the OC”? Or are you talking about the Catholic Church?

No one has ever said that you need to be Catholic to have a valid marriage. Catholics must marry according to Catholic marriage laws. Non-Catholics marry according to their own laws and those marriages are recognized by Catholics and by others. As I said about three posts up, if a non-Catholic marries, divorces, then wants to marry in the Catholic Church, there’s a problem. As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, that person is already in a valid marriage and is not free to marry again. Unless and until that person can show that his marriage is not valid, he cannot marry in the Catholic Church.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

You do not have to be RC to have a valid mariage in the eyes of God!!! Where in scripture does the RC claim only The RC defines mariage(chapter and verse)

The Catholic Church grants that a Sacrament takes place when Marriage is celebrated according to the laws of another Christian Community, as long as both are Validly Baptized and neither has been Married before and divorced. Sacraments (Baptism and Marriage) in other Christian Communities are valid because of, not in spite of the Catholic Church

 

[rick43235]

The Catholic Church grants that a Sacrament takes place when Marriage is celebrated according to the laws of another Christian Community, as long as both are Validly Baptized and neither has been Married before and divorced. Sacraments (Baptism and Marriage) in other Christian Communities are valid because of, not in spite of the Catholic Church

It is my understanding that the Catholic Church **recognizes **that a “Sacrament takes place when Marriage is celebrated according to the laws of another Christian Community…” The Catholic Church, however, has no authority to “grant” anything where another religious community is concerned. The validity of the Sacraments of other religious communities aren’t affected one way or the other by the Catholic Church…just as Catholic Sacraments are not affected by any other church.

 

[Pong]

The validity of the Sacraments of other religious communities aren’t affected one way or the other by the Catholic Church…just as Catholic Sacraments are not affected by any other church.

Actually, the validity of sacraments has everything to do with the Catholic Church. The only valid sacraments in the protestant denominations are baptism (if done correctly, of course) and marriage. Since the protestants do not have apostolic succession, any “ordination” or “consecration” they attempt is invalid to begin with. So the validity of sacraments is directly affected by the Catholic Church. Without the CC, there is no validity.

To the OP- Please ignore the lousy advice offered by catholiconce. He/she obviously has an axe to grind with the CC and is trying to use your soul to do it.

 

[jmcrae]

It is my understanding that the Catholic Church **recognizes **that a “Sacrament takes place when Marriage is celebrated according to the laws of another Christian Community…” The Catholic Church, however, has no authority to “grant” anything where another religious community is concerned. The validity of the Sacraments of other religious communities aren’t affected one way or the other by the Catholic Church…just as Catholic Sacraments are not affected by any other church.

The Sacraments are not a “make it up as you go along” Sunday School exercise.

The Sacraments were entrusted to the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ, and insofar as appropriately qualified persons can partake of them without the presence of an ordained Catholic deacon, priest, or Bishop, non-Catholic Christians have Sacraments (which means that they have Baptism and Marriage, under the proper conditions) - but make no mistake; the Sacraments belong to and are regulated by the Catholic Church. Other churches only have them, to begin with, because they received them from the Catholic Church.

 

[Seatuck]

I very much appreciate all of the advice and comments.

I went to reconcilliation last night and explained my situation as well as I could. The priest was very good and helpful. He advised me to refrain from communion and said he hadn’t studied canon law in 8 years and that he would research the issue and get back to me sometime in the next week or so. (I will anonymously call the Church. . .)

I am pleased and content with his response. he seems very willing to help and readily admitted that he couldn’t give me a quick answer. I appreciated his candor.

I am glad you found someone to work with .

 

[awantz]

When my husband and I were married he was Catholic and I was Protestant. We were married at my church, by my pastor, and it was confirmed by the Catholic church. I know you don’t want to talk to a priest and therefore, I’m sorry to tell you that in order to have your marriage confirmed by the Catholic church you will need to talk to a priest.

 

[Micahbob]

Some not very accurate information has been posted here…

The fact is that under the Code of Canon law, you no longer fall under the regulations applicable to Catholics who marry if you have left the Church by a “positive act”. Getting baptized in a protestant church, even though it is not sacramentally valid, would almost definitely qualify as a public, positive act indicating that you have left the Catholic Church, in which case, your marriage in the protestant ceremony would be valid (unless some other legal impediment existed that you haven’t mentioned here).

To get peace of mind on this, you might want to go to Google and find the Saint Joseph Foundation, an organization that gives legal advice. Their phone number is at the bottom or you can email them through a form they provide. The service is free and I have always found them helpful.

In the Cod of Canon Law it does not say “positive act,” but rather “formal act”.

The “formal act” the Code is referring to in canons 1086.1, 1117, and 1124 refers to an actus formalis defectionibis ab Ecclesia catholica, or defection by formal act.

According to a notification from the Vatican issued in 2006, this means writing a formal letter of defection to the local Ordinary (usually the Bishop). Getting “baptized” or confirmed in another sect does not constitute a formal act of defection.

However, I do not believe this 2006 notification was retroactive.

Jimmy Akin has a blog entry on this very subject:
jimmyakin.org/2006/04/formal_defectio.html

Here is the 2006 notification from the Vatican, which Jimmy also has a link to on the above blog:
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html

Specific cases should be taken to a priest or bishop.

 

[Agent]

A local priest is helping me with this ordeal and I am in email contact with the marriage tribunal at my local diocese.

It is very complicated and strange how unclear canon “law” can be.

 

[cameron_lansing]

The “formal act” the Code is referring to in canons 1086.1, 1117, and 1124 refers to an actus formalis defectionibis ab Ecclesia catholica, or defection by formal act. . . .
Specific cases should be taken to a priest or bishop.

Good advice though you may have intended to write “defectionis” (genitive) rather than “defectionibus” (ablative/dative) here.

Still a positive act of the will, that is, a willful intention, by a person capable of placing it would be necessary to effect this defection in any case, and that would be part of the examination.

 

[otjm]

It’s a strange situation for me. At the time of the marriage I felt like I was a protestant. I did not think I was Catholic at that time at all. I know I was confirmed but I did not think I was Catholic. At that time of the original marriage I was not attending Mass and did not care about things Catholic. I was even re-baptized in the Protestant faith.

OK, let’s stop the presses for a minute or two.

You need to get to a Canon lawyer, one who understands the intricacies of Church law. While priests need to take courses in Canon law, that does not make them Canon lawyers.

You said something interesting, in commenting about being re-baptized. In general, the rules which bind Catholics only bind them so long as they have not renounced the Faith. It may very well be that at the time of your marriage (which I am presuming was after your re-baptismal ceremony) you were no longer bound by form - that is, no longer bound to have your marriage officially witnessed by a priest of deacon. Since you say that you are in a rural area, you may need to get ahold of someone at the dioccese or archdiocese level, to put you in contact with a Canon lawyer, and get to the bottom of your situation.

God bless you on your journey. It is not easy; in large part because of the choices we all make along the way on that Journey, for all the reasons and excuses we make them. Sty the course. It may seem exceedingly difficult; but if God is calling you back, you need to keep focused on the call, and Who is doing the calling.