C
Cabeelibob
Guest
Is it permissible for a Catholic to officiate in a Civil wedding between two straight ex-Catholics?
- Status
C
CRV
Guest
No.
- Assuming it is known to the Catholic that both are lapsed Catholics, one may not participate in the sins of others, so you can’t officiate in a civil wedding.
- Once baptized, always Catholic - just not practicng or lapsed - generally.
- Code of Canon Law - THE FORM OF THE CELEBRATION OF MARRIAGE
1
1ke
Guest
No, Catholics may not “officiate” such an attempt at marriage. A Catholic shouldn’t be officiating at any non-Catholic weddings unless it is part of their job such as a court official.
There is no such thing as an ex-Catholic. All Catholics are bound by the Church’s laws on marriage.
Last edited:
J
jrgmercado
Guest
In Florida, a public notary can preform a civil wedding, so they won’t count as a “court official” although it is part of the duties of a public notary. So, does that mean a “Catholic” notary can’t perform a civil marriage? I have never asked nor discussed the religious affiliation with anyone in my duties as a notary, although the marriage license does state marital status (single, divorced, widowed).
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Why would someone want to encourage that two Catholics flaunt Church law?
C
Cabeelibob
Guest
My brother is getting married but doesn’t want to get married in the church. He wants a friend to marry him but the friend is Catholic. My brother was asking me if it was inappropriate to ask of his friend.
C
Cabeelibob
Guest
As a genuine question, what would you call someone who claims that they no longer believe in the Church’s teachings?
J
jrgmercado
Guest
I’ve used “culturally Catholic” before I returned to the church.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Fallen away or non-practicing Catholic.
I would encourage your brother to be careful.
I am a lapsed Catholic who identified as Protestant for most of her life, and who got married to a Protestant in a Protestant church.
Of course I did not bother to ask for a dispensation of canonical form.
Now, 13 years later, time has elapsed, things have changed, and I am wondering what went through my head back then, as I am on my way back to the Church and will need a radical sanation – which, for various reasons, will not be an easy thing to sell to my husband.
No one knows what the future holds. Better be on the safe side.
I am a lapsed Catholic who identified as Protestant for most of her life, and who got married to a Protestant in a Protestant church.
Of course I did not bother to ask for a dispensation of canonical form.
Now, 13 years later, time has elapsed, things have changed, and I am wondering what went through my head back then, as I am on my way back to the Church and will need a radical sanation – which, for various reasons, will not be an easy thing to sell to my husband.
No one knows what the future holds. Better be on the safe side.
1
1ke
Guest
Lapsed Catholic. Non-practicing Catholic.
Canonically, they remain Catholic.
Canonically, they remain Catholic.
1
1ke
Guest
Your husband need not be involved at all in a sanation.
1
1ke
Guest
It would put his friend in an awkward position. Best to get a civil officiant.
I need some help here, I’m a little confused. As I understand it, in the 1983 Code of Canon Law (CIC), provision was made for the marriage of Catholics who had left the Church “by a formal act”. Catholics who had done this were no longer bound by the canonical form of marriage. Then Pope Benedict XVI amended the canon law to remove this provision:
The Code of Canon Law nonetheless prescribes that the faithful who have left the Church “by a formal act” are not bound by the ecclesiastical laws regarding the canonical form of marriage (cf. can. 1117), dispensation from the impediment of disparity of cult (cf. can. 1086) and the need for permission in the case of mixed marriages (cf. can. 1124). The underlying aim of this exception from the general norm of can. 11 was to ensure that marriages contracted by those members of the faithful would not be invalid due to defect of form or the impediment of disparity of cult.
Experience, however, has shown that this new law gave rise to numerous pastoral problems. First, in individual cases the definition and practical configuration of such a formal act of separation from the Church has proved difficult to establish, from both a theological and a canonical standpoint. In addition, many difficulties have surfaced both in pastoral activity and the practice of tribunals. Indeed, the new law appeared, at least indirectly, to facilitate and even in some way to encourage apostasy in places where the Catholic faithful are not numerous or where unjust marriage laws discriminate between citizens on the basis of religion. The new law also made difficult the return of baptized persons who greatly desired to contract a new canonical marriage following the failure of a preceding marriage. Finally, among other things, many of these marriages in effect became, as far as the Church is concerned, “clandestine” marriages.
…
Therefore I decree that in the same Code the following words are to be eliminated: “and has not left it by a formal act” (can. 1117); “and has not left it by means of a formal act” (can. 1086 § 1); “and has not left it by a formal act” (can. 1124).
Does this mean, then, that anyone who has ever been Catholic is bound by canonical form?
That would be good. If a lapsed Catholic decides to return, they are not hamstrung by a valid marriage. They can either obtain a sanatio in radice, or they can say “either my spouse can support me in my faith, or I will be free to make things right with God and perhaps even find a spouse who will help me to get to heaven”. They wouldn’t have this choice if their marriage outside the Church were valid.
1
1ke
Guest
Yes. Anyone baptized into or received into the Church by profession of faith.
P
PetraG
Guest
In other words: If you are a justice of the peace, you do your job. If that means you are required in your capacity as an employee of the state to witness legal transactions as part of your job description, you do that.
What you may not do as a Catholic, regardless of who the couple is, is to do something like getting a mail-order “ordination” for yourself to satisfy state law that allows people to present themselves as a member of the clergy in order to satisfy state requirements to be the officiant of record for someone’s wedding vows. Catholics have real clergy; the rest of the faithful may not pretend to be members of the clergy of other religions, even religions that are paper constructions meant to give people the power to officiate at the weddings of friends.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Yes. This is why we, as parents, must understand that by baptizing our children we are making a serious commitment.
J
jrgmercado
Guest
That was the kind of clarification I was looking for because I’ve performed a few weddings.
P
PetraG
Guest
Trust me, there are Protestants who have come into the Church who have noticed this “loophole.”
I don’t think anybody leaves the Church and marries thinking, “Sweet! If I want to go back to the Church, my marriage won’t be recognized, so I have a freebie on divorce!” No, I don’t think people do that. What sane person presumes that they need to be in the Church in order to be “right with God” and yet lives outside the Church with the idea that they can come back any time they like and don’t have to be concerned that the Almighty will of course care that this person cyncially used someone else in a marriage they knew suffered from lack of the intention to remain faithful for life? No, God will not be mocked. Someone would have to be a bit crazy or deluded to think that way.
Last edited:
- Status