As a priest, I must say I’m troubled by the posters, who give no evidence of being canonists at all, who have expressed positions that are encouraging the original poster to enter into a conflict with his parish priest…the priest who is actually in situ…who knows the situation of these specific individuals and has put in place a programme for the resolution of multiple and problematic issues…who would also be aware of the Particular Law & promulgated norms governing the ecclesiastical jurisdiction to which this priest belongs and to which the original poster is a proper canonical subject
Given that Confirmation & Marriage are sacraments which require jurisdiction…either of the parish priest with jurisdiction or the Ordinary of the diocese…seeking an intervention of a priest who is not the canonical pastor is simply going to introduce another complicating dynamic
Jurisdiction is dealt with with a much different approach in other parts of the world. I’ve seen too often answers that assume the decisions of Bishops in other parts of the world simply use the same dispositions as American Bishops…and that is not the case. We make decidedly other dispositions when it comes to our Particular Law & our norms
If recourse were going to be made to anyone, it would be properly to the chancery of the diocese
Clearly this situation is dealing with a non-American in a country & culture not English language based
Therefore, the first premise must be to defer to the norms of the Bishop of the diocese & the corresponding Episcopal Conference, just as those in other parts of the world would tell Americans they must mind the laws & norms particular to their diocese & Episcopal Conference
Canon 1065.1 states: “Catholics who have not yet received the Sacrament of Confirmation are to receive it before being admitted to marriage, if this can be done without grave inconvenience.” As the Bishop is the original minister of the sacrament of Confirmation, certainly in my diocese, the Bishop has determined how to avoid “grave inconvenience,” which he has articulated definitively, but has also mandated that marriages MUST be preceded by the Sacrament of Confirmation that concern one who was baptised Catholic & subsequently was away from the Church but now seeks to return & is in need of a marriage being effected due to lack of canonical form. It is part of the essential process of returning and reconciling with the Church, which had been left. Thus the Bishop has taken the decision out of the hands of the priests of the diocese, as is his prerogative, with due regard for canons such as imminent danger of death
In the case at hand, the person was baptised Catholic, received Eucharist, and then left the Church formally. It was not that he became non-practicing. He entered another ecclesial community and moreover worked as a missionary for the other ecclesial community. It was in this condition that he contracted marriage with a non-Catholic, not observing the necessary preparation or canonical form but marrying rather according to the norms and practices of the non-Catholic community. Subsequently, he then embraced atheism