Ok to attend marriag of divorced noncatholics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sadieg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sadieg

Guest
Hi,

A friend of mine is getting married in a month to a divorced man, and she herself is twice divorced. Neither, to my knowledge, were married in a Catholic church.

I am not very close with her, so I can miss the wedding without any real issue. But, I’d like to attend if I’m not standing witness to somethign I shouldn’t be.

Is it ok to attend this wedding, as Catholic?

Thanks.
 
In general, we should not witness or give approval to invalid marriage attempts. This would be an invalid marriage attempt as both have a prior bond.

In a specific case, in consultation with your pastor, you might arrive at a different conclusion.
 
My understanding (from reading about this in the other forums) is that it is okay to attend the wedding. “Witness” is more interpreted to mean being a member of the wedding party or signing the marriage certificate as an “official witness”, rather than simply a guest. The Church does not generally prohibit the attendance of any individual Catholic at any wedding and leaves it up to the individual. Nothing wrong with consulting your priest, but I doubt he would tell you you absolutely must not attend.
 
This thread asks basically the same question and runs on to 7 pages. You might find some info in there that helps.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=792461

In the end, the Church doesn’t forbid attendance, but we have to realize that (assuming the parties are baptized non-Catholics) the remarriage is not a real wedding and the couple will be living in sin (although they might not know this which could reduce culpability). If the couple isn’t baptized then the remarriage is valid and there would be no reason to not go. God Bless.
 
Rachel126 said:
My understanding (from reading about this in the other forums) is that it is okay to attend the wedding./QUOTE]

Such can still be said to be “showing approval” of an objectively invalid marriage.

One is “celebrating” the event…

Presumption (that such was a valid marriage) can said to stand with the “first” marriages of non-Catholics.

Catechism:

1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
  • by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
  • by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
  • by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
  • by protecting evil-doers.
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a8.htm#V
Click to expand...
 
PietroPaolo said:
If the couple isn’t baptized then the remarriage is valid and there would be no reason to not go. God Bless.
Click to expand...
Not true. Couples who are unbaptized marry validly the first time. The Church recognizes first marriages and does not recognize divorce as having any effect on a valid marriage, even for non-Catholics or non-Christians.
 
nodito said:
Not true. Couples who are unbaptized marry validly the first time. The Church recognizes first marriages and does not recognize divorce as having any effect on a valid marriage, even for non-Catholics or non-Christians.
Click to expand...
Do you have a source for this? I believe a marriage between the non-baptized is valid, but not sacramental and non-sacramental marriages can be ended in divorce as Jesus raised marriage to a non-dissoluble union for Christians only. I might be wrong, though and would be open to correction if you have a source.
 
PietroPaolo said:
Do you have a source for this? I believe a marriage between the non-baptized is valid, but not sacramental and non-sacramental marriages can be ended in divorce as Jesus raised marriage to a non-dissoluble union for Christians only. I might be wrong, though and would be open to correction if you have a source.
Click to expand...
The Church does not teach that natural marriages can be ended by divorce (and therefore that divorced, unbaptized people are free to be married).

The Church does teach that natural marriages lack the same character of a sacramental marriage, and therefore can be dissolved by the competent authority (i.e. the Catholic Church) in specific circumstances (Pauline and Petrine Privilege).
 
1ke said:
The Church does not teach that natural marriages can be ended by divorce (and therefore that divorced, unbaptized people are free to be married).

The Church does teach that natural marriages lack the same character of a sacramental marriage, and therefore can be dissolved by the competent authority (i.e. the Catholic Church) in specific circumstances (Pauline and Petrine Privilege).
Click to expand...
Not that I don’t believe you but is there a Papal doc, a paragraph in the CCC, something in the Code of Canon Law, or some other definitive source for this teaching? Remember the Jews were permitted by Moses to divorce and remarry in their non-sacramental marriages.
 
PietroPaolo said:
Do you have a source for this? I believe a marriage between the non-baptized is valid, but not sacramental and non-sacramental marriages can be ended in divorce as Jesus raised marriage to a non-dissoluble union for Christians only. I might be wrong, though and would be open to correction if you have a source.
Click to expand...
Canon 1134:
From a valid marriage there arises between the spouses a bond which of its own nature is permanent and exclusive.
Click to expand...
Non-baptized persons enter into a valid, natural marriage. A valid marriage is, by definition, permanent (i.e., unable to be ended through divorce). This is why an unbaptized divorced person who wishes to remarry a Catholic would need to first receive an annulment; the Tribunal assumes that his first marriage is valid unless it can be proved otherwise.

Divorce has no effect on marriage, sacramental or otherwise. But you might be thinking of the ablility of the pope to dissolve sacramental marriages that have not be consumated, or through the Pauline privilege afforded to unbaptized individuals who wish to become baptized and remarry a Catholic when their unbaptized spouses refuses to “live peacefully” with them.
 
nodito said:
Non-baptized persons enter into a valid, natural marriage. A valid marriage is, by definition, permanent (i.e., unable to be ended through divorce). This is why an unbaptized divorced person who wishes to remarry a Catholic would need to first receive an annulment; the Tribunal assumes that his first marriage is valid unless it can be proved otherwise.

Divorce has no effect on marriage, sacramental or otherwise. But you might be thinking of the ablility of the pope to dissolve sacramental marriages that have not be consumated, or through the Pauline privilege afforded to unbaptized individuals who wish to become baptized and remarry a Catholic when their unbaptized spouses refuses to “live peacefully” with them.
Click to expand...
Good enough for me. 👍
 
sadieg said:
Hi,

A friend of mine is getting married in a month to a divorced man, and she herself is twice divorced. Neither, to my knowledge, were married in a Catholic church.

I am not very close with her, so I can miss the wedding without any real issue. But, I’d like to attend if I’m not standing witness to somethign I shouldn’t be.

Is it ok to attend this wedding, as Catholic?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Why not? Your beliefs may not be their beliefs. It is just a ceremony which you are going to and has nothing to do with your Catholic belief. I see nothing wrong with your going.
 
mayogirl25 said:
Why not? Your beliefs may not be their beliefs. It is just a ceremony which you are going to and has nothing to do with your Catholic belief. I see nothing wrong with your going.
Click to expand...
If you really hold “Catholic belief” on this matter, then you believe that the marriage is invalid - i.e. the couple are not really getting married, even though they think they are. I’ll compare attending an invalid wedding to attending a same sex wedding, two men cannot marry each other (despite what the gov’t may think) and we shouldn’t appear to be pretending they can by attending the ceremony. The same is true with an invalid heterosexual wedding. The two people are not in actual fact getting married, so we shouldn’t attend and pretend that they are.

Of course, the Church does not forbid our attending, it is a prudential decision.
 
Why not? Your beliefs may not be their beliefs. It is just a ceremony which you are going to and has nothing to do with your Catholic belief. I see nothing wrong with your going.
Click to expand...
Such can still be said to be “showing approval” of an objectively invalid marriage.

One is “celebrating” the event…celebrating something “as true” when it is not.

Presumption (that such was a valid marriage) can said to stand with the “first” marriages of non-Catholics.

(One would be celebrating that which is contrary to the their presumed marriage’s.)

Catechism:

1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
  • by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
  • by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
  • by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
  • by protecting evil-doers.
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a8.htm#V
 
I think that attending would be giving your approval and so you should not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top