Pauline Privilege

[anjoh66]

Hi!
There is a case of a person who is not baptized and is married civil with a catholic woman, this person are going to embrace the catholic faith.
The problem is that he has previous civil marriage with a non baptized person.

Now the diocese has accepted that he will get the previous marriage dissolved according to the Pauline Privilege.

The bishop will issue a decree about it.

My question is: Can the bishop issue that decree before that guy is recieved as a catechumen? or must it be afterwards?

As i have understood it for the pauline privilege to be valid he must baptise first as the privilege doesnt work if he is not a christian.
And he will not be a christian until he gets baptized. So how will the bishop issue the decree?

His relation with the catholic woman is not accepted by the church so she is being apart from the communion and she can not take communion until they convalidate the marriage, and that they cant do until he is baptised and gets the previous marriage dissolved.

I think the plan is to convalidate the marriage at the same mass when he gets baptised so he can recieve communion, because it would be strange if he gets baptised but still cant recieve the communion. Afterwards she must go to confess and reconcile with the church so she will also be able to recieve her communion.

Well thats the background of the story

My question acctually is, does anyone know how a dissolvement according to the pauline privilegie is conducted?

 

[cameron_lansing]

General comment can be made for informational purpose but since any individual case may have variables, let the diocesan bishop do what has to be done and follow his guidance or that provided by his delegate.

The Pauline Privilege is a dissolution of a valid natural marriage of two unbaptized persons, based on I Corinthians 7:12-16 and addressed in canons 1141-1150. A valid marriage entered by two non-baptized persons (which means it is not sacramental) can be dissolved in favor of the faith of a party who has received baptism by the very fact that a new marriage is contracted by the party who has been baptized, provided the non-baptized party departs (canon 1143 §1). The first marriage is dissolved by the creation of the second valid marriage.

However, there are some conditions for the use of the pauline privilege and they are found in canons 1143-1146. The most common situation in which the pauline is used can describe them in a general way. (There are other variations but this is the most typical one.) If unbaptized and seeking Catholic baptism when beginning this process, the petitioner may be received into the catechumenate.

1. Foremost, it can be proven that both parties were unbaptized when they married validly.

a. The petitioner seeks to receive Catholic baptism (or has received Catholic baptism after a wedding resulting in an invalid marriage even) and wants to marry a Catholic (or to convalidate a marriage with a Catholic).

b. The respondent remains unbaptized to the present. (An invalid baptism has the same effect as no baptism at all. “Mormon” baptism or Jesus’ name only baptism are examples of invalid baptism, and a person who received them would be considered unbaptised.)

c. The common life of the marriage had ended through permanent separation, usually signified by civil divorce.

d. The respondent departed the marriage (even though the petitioner may have filed for the divorce) or given the petitioner just cause for departing.

1. The respondent is questioned whether he or she wishes baptism and will return to peaceful common married life with the petitioner “without insult to the Creator.” (That term dates back to the 4th century and would include interference with the petitioner’s practice of the faith, or refusal to allow the Christian education of the children, or insistence on immoral sexual behavior.)

a. If the respondent replies negatively, the privilege can be invoked. (However, if a return to common married life is de facto impossible and the respondent doesn’t respond at all, it can still be invoked. That would be the case if both parties remarried even though invalidly, and common life cannot be restored.)

b. For a grave cause though, the local ordinary (for practical purpose, read as “diocesan bishop”) can dispense from the questioning when some sort of process shows it cannot be done or would be useless.

1. However, if the conditions cannot be verified for some reason, then the nullity process would be needed to see if the presumption of validity can be overturned, and the parties declared free to enter subsequent marriage. The most common difficulty is proving the non baptism of both parties at the time of the wedding.

Again, if you have questions about your own situation, consult a priest who can assess your details and respond properly rather than speculate over the internet.

 

[Just_Lurking]

My question acctually is, does anyone know how a dissolvement according to the pauline privilegie is conducted?

It is the second marriage itself, conducted after the bishop has approved the decree, that dissolves the first marriage.

From biblical principles, this second marriage would need to be after the baptism. I don’t know if Catholic rules require this order as well, or if the second marriage can occur before the baptism.

 

[cameron_lansing]

It is the second marriage itself, conducted after the bishop has approved the decree, that dissolves the first marriage.

From biblical principles, this second marriage would need to be after the baptism. I don’t know if Catholic rules require this order as well, or if the second marriage can occur before the baptism.

See within parentheses in 1a above.