Marrying a non-Catholic who is divorced

[Phemie]

Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but if your boyfriend is not Catholic and his ex is not Catholic, then they didn’t have a sacramental marriage and no decree of nullity is required. Am I wrong? Am I missing something here?

Yes, you are missing something.

First, the Catholic Church presumes that everyone (except Catholics who have married outside the Church with no dispensation) is in a valid marriage.

Further, if both parties are baptized, even if they are not Catholic, their valid marriage is sacramental, because it is their baptismal status that makes it a sacrament, not whether they are Catholics or not. If they aren’t both baptized it’s presumed that they are in a valid, natural marriage.

So his marriage is presumed to be a valid natural marriage and would need to be investigated. Now since it seems that his first wife had already been married and divorced, simply proving that that is the case might be enough to show that there was a previous bond impediment that made his marriage invalid but that’s why it needs to be investigated.

 

[1ke]

Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but if your boyfriend is not Catholic and his ex is not Catholic, then they didn’t have a sacramental marriage and no decree of nullity is required.

Marriages between non-Catholics are valid when they marry civilly. if they are both baptized, the marriage is valid and a sacrament. If one is unbaptized or both are unbaptized, the marriage is valid and a natural marriage.

He is therefore not free to marry another unless the marriage is determined to be invalid or he receives a dissolution of the bond via the Pauline or Petrine Privilege.

Am I wrong?

yes.

Am I missing something here?

Marriages between non Catholics are valid. And the impediment of prior bond applies to those who are married validly, Catholic or not.

 

[jjtc]

Yes, you are missing something.

First, the Catholic Church presumes that everyone (except Catholics who have married outside the Church with no dispensation) is in a valid marriage.

Further, if both parties are baptized, even if they are not Catholic, their valid marriage is sacramental, because it is their baptismal status that makes it a sacrament, not whether they are Catholics or not. If they aren’t both baptized it’s presumed that they are in a valid, natural marriage.

So his marriage is presumed to be a valid natural marriage and would need to be investigated. Now since it seems that his first wife had already been married and divorced, simply proving that that is the case might be enough to show that there was a previous bond impediment that made his marriage invalid but that’s why it needs to be investigated.

Thanks, I didn’t know that. Found some further clarification for myself on the USCCB website, which may be helpful to the OP.

***Why does the Catholic Church require an intended spouse, who is divorced but not Catholic, to obtain a declaration of nullity before marrying in the Catholic Church?

The Catholic Church respects the marriages of non-Catholics and presumes that they are valid. Thus, for example, it considers the marriages of two Protestant, Jewish, or even nonbelieving persons to be binding for life. Marriages between baptized persons, moreover, are considered to be sacramental. The Church requires a declaration of nullity in order to establish that an essential element was missing in that previous union that prevented it from being a valid marriage, and thus the intended spouse is free to marry.

This is often a difficult and emotional issue. If the intended spouse comes from a faith tradition that accepts divorce and remarriage, it may be hard to understand why he/she must go through the Catholic tribunal process. Couples in this situation may find it helpful to talk with a priest or deacon. To go through the process can be a sign of great love of the non-Catholic for the intended spouse.

---

usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/annulment/

 

[jmcrae]

1. 
   

   Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but if your boyfriend is not Catholic and his ex is not Catholic, then they didn’t have a sacramental marriage and no decree of nullity is required. Am I wrong? Am I missing something here?

   Actually, quite the opposite. Non-Catholic marriages are always presumed to be valid, and there are no loopholes for “lack of form” as long as the parties to the marriage were one male human being and one female human being, both over the age of 16, and it was the first marriage for both.
   
   It’s only when one of the parties was Catholic that form begins to matter.

 

[Anglewannabe]

we are best friends and help each other grow spiritually.

If you are helping him grow spiritually, how come he isn’t Catholic yet?

The main reason I haven’t scheduled anything with a priest yet is I need to talk to my boyfriend first. There is no point in scheduling a meeting with the priest if my assumptions at the hinting are wrong (maybe boyfriend doesn’t want to marry at all) or if my boyfriend comes back and says he doesn’t want to even try a Catholic wedding.

Actually, you need to find out ASAP since if he is not free to marry, it is a sin to be dating him.

Honestly, this whole thing sounds really immature. Not wanting to attend pre-cana because of work schedules? How could anyone be too busy to ensure they are marrying the right person

And why on earth would being older mean you have more time. What is so wrong with young people taking their time

I honestly just don’t get this situation at all

 

[1ke]

If you are helping him grow spiritually, how come he isn’t Catholic yet?

Angel, this is rude.

A person can grow spiritually and not yet be ready to become a Catholic, may never become a Catholic.

Actually, you need to find out ASAP since if he is not free to marry, it is a sin to be dating him.

Angel, this is NOT true. It is a prudential matter, she should talk to her pastor about it.

Not wanting to attend pre-cana because of work schedules? How could anyone be too busy to ensure they are marrying the right person

Angel you haven’t been to a premarital preparation class. I have. It was a total waste of time. But the OP isn’t saying she doesn’t want to prepare for marriage. She is asking if there are other ways to do it. The answer to that is “yes”.

And why on earth would being older mean you have more time. What is so wrong with young people taking their time

She said they weren’t in a hurry, because they know there are many moving pieces here. Freedom to marry, houses to sell, job changes… she isn’t in a rush because she wants to do things right.

I honestly just don’t get this situation at all

No you don’t, and I suspect you have no idea how rude and condescending your post comes across.