My husband was denied Baptism

[kellerk]

YOU are seeking sacramental marriage within the Church. SHE is not seeking the Church’s blessing on her current relationship as you are.

YOU therefore need to be free to enter into such a sacramental marriage. SHE does not.

She can receive baptism regardless of whether her first marriage is valid or not, although ideally she has repented and confessed of her sins of fornication and contraception, or will do so with God’s grace.

This is making more sense now. He cannot receive baptism regardless if his first marriage was valid or not because he has remarried so, now we have to clear that up first. If he had not remarried, he would be able to receive baptism. Am I on the right track? The light is coming on, thank you so much!!

 

[aemcpa]

This is making more sense now. He cannot receive baptism regardless if his first marriage was valid or not because he has remarried so, now we have to clear that up first. If he had not remarried, he would be able to receive baptism. Am I on the right track? The light is coming on, thank you so much!!

He could certainly be baptized once his first marriage is declared invalid, because then your marriage could be validated. If it turns out that his first marriage is upheld, then you and he would have to separate. Prior to the determination of his first marriage, the Church is operating under the assumption that his first marriage is valid. Since it is divorce AND REMARRIAGE that renders one unable to receive the Sacraments, your current marriage is the holdup.

 

[LilyM]

This is making more sense now. He cannot receive baptism regardless if his first marriage was valid or not because he has remarried so, now we have to clear that up first. If he had not remarried, he would be able to receive baptism. Am I on the right track? The light is coming on, thank you so much!!

Right track indeed.

You’re welcome :tiphat: Glad I could help.

 

[kellerk]

Actually, of the two of you, you’re the only one living with a man as if you were married. She is living with a man, but they are not even attempting marriage, and for all we know, she agreed to refrain from fornication and contraception until she is free to marry.

To be clear, it is definitely not OK to be living in a cohabitation arrangement where fornication and contraception are part of the equation. But it is by definition a transient arrangement and not one that necessarily persists from month to month or day to day. A civil marriage is a permanent commitment, and it is one that Catholics cannot enter without it being by its nature a sacrament. So if your husband were to be baptized, he would immediately be in a situation where he is simulating a sacrament. You have the option to get civilly divorced and physically separated, and then I cannot imagine that there would be any impediment to your husband’s baptism.

You’re right! Thank you. I guess a little bluntness is necessary sometimes.

 

[mlz]

Ok, I understand this is a complicated issue and it would take too long to go into all the details right now so, I will try to summarize for now. My husband has a desire to be baptized, wishes to enter and be in full communion with the Church, as do I. (I was baptized as a child and received first communion, had to leave Catholic school before I was able to be confirmed, now re-entering the church). We both completed the RCAI program but, due to an annulment issue, he was refused baptism and we both must wait to receive the Eucharist until the annulment is complete and we are married in the Church. This was difficult to understand but, we have come to terms with it and have accepted it and are happy to wait. The problem is, I was speaking with another lady today who attended RCAI with us. She asked why we cannot receive the Eucharist. I explained to her our situation. She seemed puzzled. She too had not been baptized, was and is still in the process of an annulment and is not married to the man she is living with and is pregnant by. They allowed her to get baptized and receive all her sacraments this past Easter vigil and they are both receiving the Eucharist each Sunday. Yet, my husband cannot get baptized and we are both made to sit out during communion.

Before I go confront our pastor, is there something I may be missing here, or has there been a grave mistake?

Was this posted before because it sounds so much like one I read recently. (or maybe it’s just similar?!)
mlz

 

[aemcpa]

You’re right! Thank you. I guess a little bluntness is necessary sometimes.

I saw the name Keller and it got my Irish up.

In the end, I hope that your husband is able to be baptized and that you are able to be married in the Church ASAP. I wouldn’t ask your pastor to discuss why another person did or didn’t receive baptism, and I like the advice of looking into the possibility of using the Pauline or Petrine Privileges to dissolve your husband’s marriage since he is not baptized. That may move the process along faster than the annulment process would otherwise go.

 

[kellerk]

Was this posted before because it sounds so much like one I read recently. (or maybe it’s just similar?!)
mlz

Not by me.

 

[kellerk]

I saw the name Keller and it got my Irish up.

In the end, I hope that your husband is able to be baptized and that you are able to be married in the Church ASAP. I wouldn’t ask your pastor to discuss why another person did or didn’t receive baptism, and I like the advice of looking into the possibility of using the Pauline or Petrine Privileges to dissolve your husband’s marriage since he is not baptized. That may move the process along faster than the annulment process would otherwise go.

That’s my married name. I’m Italian so… yeah, I get it.

Anyway, yeah, we have to go the formal route. Something about his ex, although not catholic, was baptized and I guess that makes a difference. But, I think I’ve gotten my answer. I feel much better now. I really appreciate everybodies help through my minor little crisis.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

My husband was married and divorced. His ex was not catholic. He was never baptized.

An important point with your husband’s prior marriage is whether or not his ex-wife was baptized. If she was baptized, and your husband becomes baptized, that marriage is no longer treated at a “natural” marriage, but a “sacramental” one. That means using the Pauline and Petrine Privileges are out of the picture.

You do not want to throw those options out the window. For a marriage involving two baptized persons, if the marriage is found to be valid, no annulment is granted and you are flat out of luck with your current marital situation. However, if your husband remains unbaptized, and the marriage is found to be valid, dissolution of the marriage is a possibility.

While your situation is difficult, please be patient. Also, don’t worry about other people’s situations; that’ll just drive you crazy. I know, because I’ve had to deal with my own convalidation. Focus on your own situation, and as long as your husband remains unbaptized during this period, you’re basically guaranteed a convalidation, due to having the option of an annulment AND a dissolution of the bond.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Something about his ex, although not catholic, was baptized and I guess that makes a difference.

I posted before I saw this. To reemphasize, this is a very relevant point. Your husband getting baptized at this point would significantly complicate the problem, because his prior marriage would be treated as a sacramental marriage. That’s not something you’d want to do.

 

[aemcpa]

An important point with your husband’s prior marriage is whether or not his ex-wife was baptized. If she was baptized, and your husband becomes baptized, that marriage is no longer treated at a “natural” marriage, but a “sacramental” one. That means using the Pauline and Petrine Privileges are out of the picture.

The OP did mention that her husband’s ex-wife was baptized.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

The OP did mention that her husband’s ex-wife was baptized.

I saw that after I posted…and it means that her husband should not get baptized. Remaining unbaptized during this time is essentially a guarantee for regularization of their current marriage.

 

[aemcpa]

I saw that after I posted…and it means that her husband should not get baptized. Remaining unbaptized during this time is essentially a guarantee for regularization of their current marriage.

Just make sure he carries a bottle of water in the car just in case.

IIRC, that would be the Petrine Privilege, by which the Pope could dissolve a valid marriage between a baptized woman and an unbaptized man if the unbaptized man wants to marry a Catholic. So even if the annulment process determines that her husband is validly married to his ex-wife, he could ask Rome to dissolve it so that he can marry a Catholic and get baptized.

 

[kellerk]

Just make sure he carries a bottle of water in the car just in case.

IIRC, that would be the Petrine Privilege, by which the Pope could dissolve a valid marriage between a baptized woman and an unbaptized man if the unbaptized man wants to marry a Catholic. So even if the annulment process determines that her husband is validly married to his ex-wife, he could ask Rome to dissolve it so that he can marry a Catholic and get baptized.

I will keep that in mind, although we are confident he will be granted an annulment based on other extenuating circumstances regarding their marriage. We have been informed of the baptism of desire and what that means and that if something were to happen that I or someone else could baptize him if absolutely necessary.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

I will keep that in mind, although we are confident he will be granted an annulment based on other extenuating circumstances regarding their marriage. We have been informed of the baptism of desire and what that means and that if something were to happen that I or someone else could baptize him if absolutely necessary.

Baptism of desire most definitely applies.

As far as the annulment goes, one should never assume it’s a given. It’s up to the Tribunal and the Tribunal alone. There are occasional posts on this forum where people are divorced and remarried, their annulments are denied, and then they have a major problem. Since you husband is not baptized, if the annulment fails, then he has additional options, which are likely to be granted given he wishes to convert. In the worst case scenario it could take some time, but you’re actually in a good place.

 

[Miss_Felicity]

I mean this in the most charitable of ways OP, but please mind your business next time. You got yourself all up in arms and upset just to find out that your Priest was working in your best interests. Nothing fruitful comes from comparing our personal circumstances to anyone else’s.

 

[Gorgias]

Nothing fruitful comes from comparing our personal circumstances to anyone else’s.

Not necessarily … in this case, kellerk learned quite a bit about the Church’s discipline and teachings on marriage, divorce, remarriage, and baptism!

 

[PJM]

=Ruthie again;10688466]My husband and I lived “as brother and sister” for the two years it took for the Tribunal to investigate my first marriage and declare it null. But we were confirmed with the rest of our RCIA class. He was a baptized Catholic, and fell away. He has “reverted.” I am a convert. So our situation is similar to yours.

So my question is, are you willing to give up all the affectionate actions of marriage, and just be roommates? No flirting, kissing, or making love, because in the Church’s eyes you are still married to your first husband (until the marriage is declared null), so being romantic with anyone else is adultery. If you refuse to do that, then you are in grave and possibly mortal sin, and probably unfit to receive the Eucharist.

It’s tough - I know! What helped me the most was putting my husband’s salvation over my desire to love him fully. I want to see him in Heaven!

There are other marital issues that can make a marriage invalid, such as contraception, refusing to be open to children, IVF, “open” marriages, etc.

If I can help with advice and/or suggestions about living “as brother and sister,” please PM me!

In the meantime, you could contact a canon lawyer to find out why our confirmations were allowed and yours was denied. (And if you find out that your pastor is right - please tell me!!)

With heartfelt prayers,

Thank you so much for sharing your story with us

 

[kellerk]

My husband and I lived “as brother and sister” for the two years it took for the Tribunal to investigate my first marriage and declare it null. But we were confirmed with the rest of our RCIA class. He was a baptized Catholic, and fell away. He has “reverted.” I am a convert. So our situation is similar to yours.

So my question is, are you willing to give up all the affectionate actions of marriage, and just be roommates? No flirting, kissing, or making love, because in the Church’s eyes you are still married to your first husband (until the marriage is declared null), so being romantic with anyone else is adultery. If you refuse to do that, then you are in grave and possibly mortal sin, and probably unfit to receive the Eucharist.

It’s tough - I know! What helped me the most was putting my husband’s salvation over my desire to love him fully. I want to see him in Heaven!

There are other marital issues that can make a marriage invalid, such as contraception, refusing to be open to children, IVF, “open” marriages, etc.

If I can help with advice and/or suggestions about living “as brother and sister,” please PM me!

In the meantime, you could contact a canon lawyer to find out why our confirmations were allowed and yours was denied. (And if you find out that your pastor is right - please tell me!!)

With heartfelt prayers,

You know Ruthie, I saw your post and meant to get back to you. To answer your question, no one ever asked us if we were willing to live as brother and sister. It was not mentioned once. But, we have been doing so on our own and have not spoken of it to anyone. It never dawned on me though, that flirting or kissing was a part of it. Its not like we’re trying to follow some rule, its more like The Lord has put it in our hearts what to do (and not do!) and it kind of just worked out that way. So, all glory goes to Him.

I thank you for your advice and for sharing your story as well. And your prayers are greatly appreciated.

 

[Cider]

I knew this issue was too complicated to try to talk about on here. First, I want to say, I know how it may sound as if I’m angry or something but, that is not the case. I’m really just trying to understand and get advice on what I should do. Certainly I’m not going to just walk up and start a confrontation with my pastor. That’s not what I meant. I would like to ask someone though. It’s hard to explain without it sounding petty but, I have an honest inquiry here.

My husband was married and divorced. His ex was not catholic. He was never baptized.
She was married and divorced. Her ex was not catholic. She was never baptized.

She’s cohabitatng. We’re in a civil marriage.

She’s currently seeking an annulment. He’s currently seeking an annulment.

She received baptism. He did not.

I’m not sure if I can just ignore these facts and just go on waiting for years wondering if there has just been a mistake and that he could’ve been baptized all along.

Perhaps I’ll speak with the director, and perhaps even ask my friend to be a part of the conversation. It’s not as if I’m upset with her, she’s a very nice lady and she did confide in me, I didn’t seek her out. Its not as if I’m conspiring anything. I just have honest questions.

The only thing I can think of is that she agreed to a platonic relationship with the father of her child while waiting for the annulment?