Orthodox validly married outside the Orthodox Church?

[HomeschoolDad]

If an Eastern Orthodox Christian marries outside the Orthodox Church, whether to another Orthodox or to a non-Orthodox — such as by a justice of the peace or Protestant minister — is their marriage regarded as valid by the Catholic Church?

At first blush, I know this might seem ridiculous — “non-Catholics are not bound by canonical form” — but since the Orthodox Churches are true Churches, would their bishops not have the authority to bind their faithful to their own canons, which (presumably) include the obligation to marry before an Orthodox priest (“crowning”) for the marriage to be valid?

I have more in mind an Orthodox Christian who seeks to marry in the Catholic Church, yet has a previous marriage outside the Orthodox Church, and seeks a declaration of nullity for that marriage. Would that marriage be considered ipso facto invalid, or valid?

I do not know anyone for whom this is an issue — it is just a matter of theoretical knowledge. (I did, however, have a non-Orthodox co-worker who married an Orthodox Christian in a civil ceremony.)

 

[HomeschoolDad]

That is very good information, and if I were to marry an Orthodox Christian, I would actually be honored to marry before an Orthodox priest — as an aside, the ceremony is far more beautiful (think of the wedding scene from The Deer Hunter). I would, of course, seek permission from my Catholic bishop, even though it’s not strictly required for validity (licitness yes, validity no).

But that’s not quite what I was asking. Simply put, if an Orthodox Christian (or two Orthodox Christians, for that matter) were to marry outside the Orthodox Church — such as by a JP or a “wedding chapel” minister — would their marriage be seen as valid by the Catholic Church?

I have in mind a scenario such as this: an Orthodox Christian seeks to marry a Catholic in the Catholic Church — not recommended, I know, but just supposing they did, just supposing that they were only nominally Orthodox, had no real ties to the Orthodox Church, and just wanted the Catholic ceremony. Perhaps they are thinking of converting to Roman Catholicism. Twenty years ago, they married a Baptist before a justice of the peace. Would the Catholic Church be able to say “you were bound by Orthodox canons, the Orthodox Church is a true Church, and you failed to adhere to their canonical form, so it’s simple, your marriage to the Baptist was invalid for lack of sacramental form”, or would she say “you were not bound by any kind of canonical form, so yes, your marriage is presumed valid, and you’re going to have to go through the annulment process, proofs, psychological factors, and so on, and try to find something wrong with your putatively valid marriage from the very beginning”?

 

[XXI_4]

yes, your marriage is presumed valid, and you’re going to have to go through the annulment process, proofs, psychological factors, and so on, and try to find something wrong with your putatively valid marriage from the very beginning”

Any marriage is always presumed valid if the person was baptized in any Christian Church (whose Baptism the Church recognizes).

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

yes, your marriage is presumed valid, and you’re going to have to go through the annulment process, proofs, psychological factors, and so on, and try to find something wrong with your putatively valid marriage from the very beginning”

Any marriage is always presumed valid if the person was baptized in any Christian Church (whose Baptism the Church recognizes).

So are you saying that Orthodox Christians are not bound by Orthodox canonical form in contracting marriages that the Catholic Church would consider valid?

So, if for instance, an Orthodox Christian were to marry a Presbyterian in a hot-air balloon over the Napa Valley with a Buddhist priest presiding over the ceremony, the Catholic Church would maintain that this marriage is considered valid? And what if the spouse were a Hindu instead of a Presbyterian?

 

[Diaconia]

Canonically, marriage enjoys the favor of the law. Each and every attempt at marriage must be looked at.

For Orthodox Christians, marriage is their Church is required.

If this is a legitimate question, you should refer the Orthodox person to their own hierarchs - rather than trying to play armchair canonist.

If it’s just a fun exercise, understand that Orthodoxy does not care what the Catholic Church (nor its Tribunal), has to say about the matter.

In short - follow the counsel and requirements of the parties involved. If one is an Orthodox Christian, they need to see their own priest, full stop.

Khrystos Voskres!
Fr. Deacon Christopher

 

[XXI_4]

So are you saying that Orthodox Christians are not bound by Orthodox canonical form in contracting marriages that the Catholic Church would consider valid?

If you’re talking about this person later trying to be married in a Catholic church, then what matters at that point is Catholic canon law. And yes, the Catholic church would presume it was a valid marriage, regardless if the person followed Orthodox canonical form.

I’ll give you a real life example. My wife was baptized as an infant in a Methodist church. When she was a teenager she married an unbaptized atheist in a civil ceremony before a judge, and shortly thereafter got a dissolution.

She had to have a full annulment before we could be married. Because she was a baptized Christian the Catholic church presumed the marriage (in a civil ceremony, to an unbaptized atheist) was valid.

The presumption is always that any marriage involving a baptized person is valid until proven otherwise by the tribunal.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Canonically, marriage enjoys the favor of the law. Each and every attempt at marriage must be looked at.

For Orthodox Christians, marriage is their Church is required.

If this is a legitimate question, you should refer the Orthodox person to their own hierarchs - rather than trying to play armchair canonist.

If it’s just a fun exercise, understand that Orthodoxy does not care what the Catholic Church (nor its Tribunal), has to say about the matter.

In short - follow the counsel and requirements of the parties involved. If one is an Orthodox Christian, they need to see their own priest, full stop.

I am quite aware that the Orthodox Church could not care less what the Catholic Church thinks about the validity or non-validity of the marriage of any Orthodox faithful. I am referring more to what happens if an Orthodox Christian, for whatever reason, approaches the Catholic Church to get an opinion as to whether their marriage was valid or not.

It’s not just a “fun exercise”. It is true that I have no “dog in this fight”, but very often, I seek knowledge for its own sake. I can also foresee that this would be helpful to someone who is in this situation. It would be a pretty drab, utilitarian world if everyone just thought about, and cared about, the things that directly affect them in their own lives.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

So are you saying that Orthodox Christians are not bound by Orthodox canonical form in contracting marriages that the Catholic Church would consider valid?

If you’re talking about this person later trying to be married in a Catholic church, then what matters at that point is Catholic canon law. And yes, the Catholic church would presume it was a valid marriage, regardless if the person followed Orthodox canonical form.

I’ll give you a real life example. My wife was baptized as an infant in a Methodist church. When she was a teenager she married an unbaptized atheist in a civil ceremony before a judge, and shortly thereafter got a dissolution.

She had to have a full annulment before we could be married. Because she was a baptized Christian the Catholic church presumed the marriage (in a civil ceremony, to an unbaptized atheist) was valid.

The presumption is always that any marriage involving a baptized person is valid until proven otherwise by the tribunal.

I understand precisely what you are saying, I just wondered if it is “different” for Orthodox because the Catholic Church recognizes Orthodoxy as a “true Church”.

 

[Diaconia]

To address actual problems (not theoretical) ones; the USCCB examined Eastern / Catholic marriage issues similar to these years ago.

The decision given by the Catholic bishops is quite simple: Marriage between Orthodox and Catholics need to follow the stricter rules of the Orthodox Churches. As such, the liturgies are to take place in Orthodox Churches.

When the case involves an Orthodox Christian and someone who is not Catholic, it is not our business and advice should be deferred to Orthodox priests. This addresses your point of Orthodoxy being a true Church. A Baptist and an Orthodox Christian marrying should be encouraged to follow the canons of the Orthodox Church.

Catholics specifically do not undermine the canons of our Sister Churches; which was the impetus to the USCCB ruling I mentioned before.

Fr. Deacon Christopher

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The decision given by the Catholic bishops is quite simple: Marriage between Orthodox and Catholics need to follow the stricter rules of the Orthodox Churches. As such, the liturgies are to take place in Orthodox Churches.

When the case involves an Orthodox Christian and someone who is not Catholic, it is not our business and advice should be deferred to Orthodox priests. This addresses your point of Orthodoxy being a true Church. A Baptist and an Orthodox Christian marrying should be encouraged to follow the canons of the Orthodox Church.

Catholics specifically do not undermine the canons of our Sister Churches; which was the impetus to the USCCB ruling I mentioned before.

OK, very good, I entirely get this. When you say “Catholics specifically do not undermine the canons of our Sister Churches”, this gets more at what I was asking, viz. “do Catholics regard Orthodox as bound to their own canonical norms for contracting a valid marriage?”.

Again, if an Orthodox does not follow these canonical norms, and wishes to marry a Catholic in a subsequent marriage, is their prior non-canonical marriage regarded as ipso facto invalid by the Catholic Church (because they did not observe the canons), or is it presumed valid because they are considered non-Catholics by the Catholic Church?

 

[acanonlawyer]

But that’s not quite what I was asking. Simply put, if an Orthodox Christian (or two Orthodox Christians, for that matter) were to marry outside the Orthodox Church — such as by a JP or a “wedding chapel” minister — would their marriage be seen as valid by the Catholic Church?

From the 2005 “Instruction” Dignitas connubii: " Art. 4 – § 1. Whenever an ecclesiastical judge must decide about the nullity of a marriage of baptized non-Catholics:

…

1. in regard to the form of celebration of marriage, the Church recognizes any form prescribed or accepted in the Church or ecclesial community to which the parties belonged at the time of the marriage, provided that, if at least one party is a member of a non-Catholic Eastern Church, the marriage was celebrated with a sacred rite."

Dan

 

[HomeschoolDad]

in regard to the form of celebration of marriage, the Church recognizes any form prescribed or accepted in the Church or ecclesial community to which the parties belonged at the time of the marriage, provided that, if at least one party is a member of a non-Catholic Eastern Church, the marriage was celebrated with a sacred rite."

Ah-hah!

(Cue the old commercials for Familiprix pharmacy in Quebec where the dour, bald pharmacist says “ah-hah! - Familiprix!” Google it if you’re interested.)

You have cut entirely to the core of what I was asking. The words in bold address exactly the point I was trying to make.

Bottom line: yes, Orthodox have to marry in the Orthodox Church, for it to be a valid marriage.

 

[Diaconia]

A further point to consider:

An Orthodox Christian who joins the Catholic Church - becomes a member of an Eastern Catholic Church, not the Latin (Western) Church.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

A further point to consider:

An Orthodox Christian who joins the Catholic Church - becomes a member of an Eastern Catholic Church, not the Latin (Western) Church.

Quite right. But I have to think there are some, who would want to transfer to the Latin Rite. Not saying that I endorse or recommend this, just stating the fact. I am all in favor of Easterners remaining Easterners, and Westerners remaining Westerners. The two traditions enrich each other — “both lungs”.

 

[jeannetherese]

If memory serves, in such a situation, children would follow the tradition of the father.

 

[1ke]

If an Eastern Orthodox Christian marries outside the Orthodox Church, whether to another Orthodox or to a non-Orthodox — such as by a justice of the peace or Protestant minister — is their marriage regarded as valid by the Catholic Church?

No.

1234567890

 

[Diaconia]

Yes, children are members of their father’s Church.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

If an Eastern Orthodox Christian marries outside the Orthodox Church, whether to another Orthodox or to a non-Orthodox — such as by a justice of the peace or Protestant minister — is their marriage regarded as valid by the Catholic Church?

No.

1234567890

Based upon what @acanonlawyer quoted above? That seems to say it all.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

I am all in favor of Easterners remaining Easterners, and Westerners remaining Westerners. The two traditions enrich each other — “both lungs”.

What is very interesting that under current canon law, if Western Orthodox converts to Catholicism, said person is to become Eastern Catholic based on his previous Autocephalous Church (as Western Orthodoxy is always under Eastern Orthodox Bishop). I think canon law ought to be somewhat changed to support existence of Western Orthodox converts to Catholicism.

Just unrelated curiosity though

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

I am all in favor of Easterners remaining Easterners, and Westerners remaining Westerners. The two traditions enrich each other — “both lungs”.

What is very interesting that under current canon law, if Western Orthodox converts to Catholicism, said person is to become Eastern Catholic based on his previous Autocephalous Church (as Western Orthodoxy is always under Eastern Orthodox Bishop). I think canon law ought to be somewhat changed to support existence of Western Orthodox converts to Catholicism.

Just unrelated curiosity though

It should be, but Western Orthodoxy is such a small movement, and was basically “created” by autocephalous Orthodox churches (Antiochian and possibly others) to appeal to Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and other liturgical Christians with Western cultural sensibilities, that canon law doesn’t provide for it. I would doubt that there are more than just a few thousand Western Orthodox in the whole world.