Protestant Marriage/Divorce and then remarriage compared to gay "marriage"

[comrade1789]

As Catholics we can’t give any kind of assent to so called “gay marriage” even if it involves one of our family members, because it is not marriage at all.

As a Catholic, how am I to treat the marriage of my protestant mom who has been divorced twice and is now with her 3rd husband? Her 1st husband, my dad, is for all i know the only valid marriage. So does that mean that I am not to acknowledge my mother’s current marriage as a marriage, and that i shouldn’t spend the night at her house when I visit since they sleep in the same bed together? Because this is what would be expected of me if my mother were “married” to another woman. I don’t ask this to be sarcastic, I am really wondering.

Thanks,.

 

[FrancisB]

That is a quandary. I’m quite certain that the two issues are not equal the way you are making them, but I understand your point. Strictly speaking, your mother’s first marriage was valid. Without an annulment the other two are adulterous. I don’t think we could possible recognise her as being validly married. That said, I’m not sure how to act beyond that, especially considering that it is your mother, although I do believe it to be beneficial to express to her the fact that she really should fix the situation.

 

[ltwin]

You said she was Protestant right? How exactly do you propose that she fix her marriage situation? She isn’t Catholic, so she can’t get an annulment (am I mistaken?).

 

[FrancisB]

Well, following the original comparison, perhaps the same way I’d tell a gay man to fix his marriage situation: leave the invalid marriage and live a life of chastity.

 

[Edmundus1581]

As Catholics we can’t give any kind of assent to so called “gay marriage” even if it involves one of our family members, because it is not marriage at all.

As a Catholic, how am I to treat the marriage of my protestant mom who has been divorced twice and is now with her 3rd husband? Her 1st husband, my dad, is for all i know the only valid marriage. **So does that mean that I am not to acknowledge my mother’s current marriage as a marriage, ** **Yes **and that i shouldn’t spend the night at her house when I visit since they sleep in the same bed together? **No **Because **this is what would be expected of me if my mother were “married” to another woman. ****No, it wouldn’t **I don’t ask this to be sarcastic, I am really wondering.

Thanks,.

In My Humble Opinion:
When you honor your mother, as your mother, by visiting her, and staying over, you are not personally endorsing her choices.

Are you quite sure that you couldn’t visit her if she were living with a woman? There may be some people who would say that, but you don’t have to accept their advise.

If she had some Wicca books in her home, would you see visiting her as endorsing those books?

There may come a time when you have to ask these questions in relation to your own children. Will you not visit them if they are co-habitating? Imagine this situation: One of your children is in a loving, monogamous, long-term, “live-in” relationship with a divorced person. Your child and partner have several children. Will you never stay over at their house? If you decide not to stay over with your mother now, then you should also not stay over with your children and grand-children when they are in “irregular” marital situations. (Situations such as this are very common. Catholic parents and siblings have to deal with it all the time.)

When Pope Benedict XVI visited England recently he shook hands a woman “priest” and smiled politely. In doing so he was not endorsing her ordination.

On the other hand, one can certainly imagine extreme situations eek:!) where one wouldn’t visit the home of a relative, but I think that neither a third marriage, or a “gay” relationship, qualify.

I guess my bottom line is: whatever “standard” you apply to visiting you mother, be prepared to apply it to your brothers, sisters, children and grand-children.

 

[mike_oconnell]

Being that she is your mother, perhaps a loving discussion with her concerning what marriage is " from a Catholic perspective" as well as biblical texts pertaining to marriage. Tthis may help if she is a “bible believing christian”

 

[FrancisB]

Just because the Protestant churches allow remarriage doesn’t mean that it is valid. If Protestant marriages are valid, we could only possibly accept the validity of the first marriage. Otherwise we would be saying that remarriage is an acceptable practice for them, but not for us. That smacks of relativism.

The church has not always recognised the validity of non-Catholic marriages, either. While in practice we don’t tell Protestants that they aren’t really married, there has always been a line of thinking in the church that non-sacramental marriages don’t really count, and therefore that if someone that was married and divorced in a Protestant (and certainly in a non-Christian) service converts and wants to marry that they have not been married. This was the view the early church took of pagan marriages.

 

[comrade1789]

That is a quandary. I’m quite certain that the two issues are not equal the way you are making them, but I understand your point. Strictly speaking, your mother’s first marriage was valid. Without an annulment the other two are adulterous. I don’t think we could possible recognise her as being validly married. That said, I’m not sure how to act beyond that, especially considering that it is your mother, although I do believe it to be beneficial to express to her the fact that she really should fix the situation.

This is my understanding as well, but yeah, it looks like you can see the “quandary” as you put it. It is not the fact that she was a Protestant and married, because we recognize the marriages of all kinds of faiths, just not as sacramental marriages. It is the divorce and remarrying bit that causes the controversy here.

 

[comrade1789]

Being that she is your mother, perhaps a loving discussion with her concerning what marriage is " from a Catholic perspective" as well as biblical texts pertaining to marriage. Tthis may help if she is a “bible believing christian”

Certainly, and we’ve discussed this and it was quite positive. But i am trying to arrive at something concrete

 

[comrade1789]

In My Humble Opinion:
When you honor your mother, as your mother, by visiting her, and staying over, you are not personally endorsing her choices.

Are you quite sure that you couldn’t visit her if she were living with a woman? There may be some people who would say that, but you don’t have to accept their advise.

If she had some Wicca books in her home, would you see visiting her as endorsing those books?

There may come a time when you have to ask these questions in relation to your own children. Will you not visit them if they are co-habitating? Imagine this situation: One of your children is in a loving, monogamous, long-term, “live-in” relationship with a divorced person. Your child and partner have several children. Will you never stay over at their house? If you decide not to stay over with your mother now, then you should also not stay over with your children and grand-children when they are in “irregular” marital situations. (Situations such as this are very common. Catholic parents and siblings have to deal with it all the time.)

When Pope Benedict XVI visited England recently he shook hands a woman “priest” and smiled politely. In doing so he was not endorsing her ordination.

On the other hand, one can certainly imagine extreme situations eek:!) where one wouldn’t visit the home of a relative, but I think that neither a third marriage, or a “gay” relationship, qualify.

I guess my bottom line is: whatever “standard” you apply to visiting you mother, be prepared to apply it to your brothers, sisters, children and grand-children.

Yeah, I don’t think we are anywhere near the same page on this one, but I am definately in agreement with your bottom line, which is what I am trying to arrive at here.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

She is indeed married, just not Catholic. Are you saying Jewish marriages are not valid? Or Muslim marriages?
You would not be able to stay in their homes?
Divorce is allowed in the Protestant church so there is no need for her to get an annulment before marrying again unless she wanted to get married in the catholic church, which it seems she does not.

The Church teaches us that only Catholics are bound by ecclesiastical law. She also teaches that everyone: Catholic, non-Catholic Christians, non-Christians, and non-believers are bound by Divine Law. It is not ecclesiastical law that says we cannot get married if there is a prior bond. It is Divine Law. Consequently, if a Protestant marries and subsequently divorces and following divorce marries a second time their second marriage is invalid and adulterous.

 

[comrade1789]

The Church teaches us that only Catholics are bound by ecclesiastical law. She also teaches that everyone: Catholic, non-Catholic Christians, non-Christians, and non-believers are bound by Divine Law. It is not ecclesiastical law that says we cannot get married if there is a prior bond. It is Divine Law. Consequently, if a Protestant marries and subsequently divorces and following divorce marries a second time their second marriage is invalid and adulterous.

That is how I understand the issue as well. Here is a twist. My sister is a protestant, twice divorced and is now planning to marry her third husband. There is a Catholic Church that rents out its event center for weddings and special events, and my sister and her new beau are going to be married by a protestant minister in the event center that is owned by the local Parish.

I don’t want to cause my sister a hard time, she’s made up her mind and no one is going to convince her otherwise. However, I do not want one of our Catholic parishes lending its facilities or services to an adulterous event. Certainly they wouldn’t let a gay couple “marry” there, why would they allow a divorced protestant woman to marry another protestant man in one of their facilities? I am thinking seriously of contacting the HallRental/Events Coordinator of the parish hall and asking him if this is acceptable practice and why. If my sister wants to go ahead with this marriage, I don’t want her involving Catholics in being complicit in any aspect of it.

Before I do that, is there any feedback or suggestions from any orthodox Roman Catholics? Maybe I am missing something here.

Thanks

 

[Matthew_Holford]

That is how I understand the issue as well. Here is a twist. My sister is a protestant, twice divorced and is now planning to marry her third husband. There is a Catholic Church that rents out its event center for weddings and special events, and my sister and her new beau are going to be married by a protestant minister in the event center that is owned by the local Parish.

I don’t want to cause my sister a hard time, she’s made up her mind and no one is going to convince her otherwise. However, I do not want one of our Catholic parishes lending its facilities or services to an adulterous event. Certainly they wouldn’t let a gay couple “marry” there, why would they allow a divorced protestant woman to marry another protestant man in one of their facilities? I am thinking seriously of contacting the HallRental/Events Coordinator of the parish hall and asking him if this is acceptable practice and why. If my sister wants to go ahead with this marriage, I don’t want her involving Catholics in being complicit in any aspect of it.

Before I do that, is there any feedback or suggestions from any orthodox Roman Catholics? Maybe I am missing something here.

Thanks

I understand your sentiments. First of all there is the issue of your sister not being free to marry due to the impediment of prior bond. If she is on her third husband her understanding of and commitment to marriage might be questionable. Now you have a problem. If you inform the people responsible for the hall would it allow your sister time to find another venue. You say this marriage is going ahead so do you want to get the venue to cancel and then have a big falling out with your sister. I also often wonder when halls like this are hired out by the Church whether there is a greater concern over economics or spirituality. You might want to consider these things.

 

[couponfit]

As Catholics we can’t give any kind of assent to so called “gay marriage” even if it involves one of our family members, because it is not marriage at all.

As a Catholic, how am I to treat the marriage of my protestant mom who has been divorced twice and is now with her 3rd husband? Her 1st husband, my dad, is for all i know the only valid marriage. So does that mean that I am not to acknowledge my mother’s current marriage as a marriage, and that i shouldn’t spend the night at her house when I visit since they sleep in the same bed together? Because this is what would be expected of me if my mother were “married” to another woman. I don’t ask this to be sarcastic, I am really wondering.

Thanks,.

The simple pastoral answer is that your Mother and even Gays since you placed them before your question have free will. When we attend mass there is a point where we give each other the sign of peace in the Novos Ordo (current mass of the western rite). There are a few ways this is done, but in some church’s it is started by the priest and then he says peace to the alter servers who then go to the front pews in each column and from there the peace flows back. It is the peace of God which we extend to each other was being of God.

Those who are divorced, protestants, and Gays are most assuredly welcomed to any mass (I put that group together because you did in your question). We cannot compel ones faith nor coerce them in any way. But the sign of peace is not a sign of forgiveness from God, as there is no reconciliation that occurs. Nor is the sign of peace our endorsement of that person. We merely accept that person as a create of God, as a creation and as a recipient of God’s love and message. It is up to that person to reconcile their actions with their own faith as you too must do.

As a son, you are simply to love your Mother regardless of any flaws you may see in her. Accept her as your Mother and find place in your heart to serve as a witness of God’s Mercy and Love. Greet her and her husband, do not lecture them nor do you have to endorse them. Merely give to your Mother that which she has earned–your love. Give to her all that her marriage which is documented on paper and signed by the state deserve and is required by the state. What does the state require you do for married couples anyways? As for situations like dinner–break bread, share prayer, and have harmony. Dwell on your own salvation and pray for your mothers enlightenment.

 

[comrade1789]

I understand your sentiments. First of all there is the issue of your sister not being free to marry due to the impediment of prior bond. If she is on her third husband her understanding of and commitment to marriage might be questionable. Now you have a problem. If you inform the people responsible for the hall would it allow your sister time to find another venue. You say this marriage is going ahead so do you want to get the venue to cancel and then have a big falling out with your sister. I also often wonder when halls like this are hired out by the Church whether there is a greater concern over economics or spirituality. You might want to consider these things.

It sounds like you understand my conundrum. Thank you, I will consider these things. Now I am wondering if I am now obliged to inform the Catholic parish, otherwise I will have potentially allowed them to be an accesory of another’s sin through consent and partaking, and that I will now be an accessory by silence.

 

[BettyBoop416]

The Church teaches us that only Catholics are bound by ecclesiastical law. She also teaches that everyone: Catholic, non-Catholic Christians, non-Christians, and non-believers are bound by Divine Law. It is not ecclesiastical law that says we cannot get married if there is a prior bond. It is Divine Law. Consequently, if a Protestant marries and subsequently divorces and following divorce marries a second time their second marriage is invalid and adulterous.

But…this is the CATHOLIC interpretation of divine law. There are plenty of other religions that don’t see it this way. It’s kind of silly of us to expect them to live their lives in accordance with Catholic thought.

 

[comrade1789]

But…this is the CATHOLIC interpretation of divine law. There are plenty of other religions that don’t see it this way. It’s kind of silly of us to expect them to live their lives in accordance with Catholic thought.

Servant of God Fr. John Hardon S.J. who helped compile the CCC, had this to say in his work, The Catholic Catechism, citing both PiusVI & Pius XI,

“It might be asked whether only Christian marriage is indisoluble. The Catholic position is that a permanent bond, until death, partakes of the essence of every true marriage, even among persons who are not baptized believers. This is very pertinent to the question of whether the State has a right to dissolve the validly contracted marriages that are not sacramental, since it is clearly outside the scope of civil authority to give Christians the moral right to re-marry. The answer is unequivocal.
Although the sacramental element may be absent from a marriage, as is the case among unbelievers, still in such a marriage, inasmuch as it is a true marriage, there must remain and indeed there does remain that perpetual bond which by divine right is so bound up with matrimony from its first institution that it is not subject to any civil power.”

 

[BettyBoop416]

Servant of God Fr. John Hardon S.J. who helped compile the CCC, had this to say in his work, The Catholic Catechism, citing both PiusVI & Pius XI,

“It might be asked whether only Christian marriage is indisoluble. The Catholic position is that a permanent bond, until death, partakes of the essence of every true marriage, even among persons who are not baptized believers. This is very pertinent to the question of whether the State has a right to dissolve the validly contracted marriages that are not sacramental, since it is clearly outside the scope of civil authority to give Christians the moral right to re-marry. The answer is unequivocal.
Although the sacramental element may be absent from a marriage, as is the case among unbelievers, still in such a marriage, inasmuch as it is a true marriage, there must remain and indeed there does remain that perpetual bond which by divine right is so bound up with matrimony from its first institution that it is not subject to any civil power.”

Again…this is a Catholic authority presenting the Catholic position. I’m not saying that the good Father isn’t correct. I’m merely saying that a non-Catholic is likely to be unmoved by an appeal to a Catholic authority, and would most likely not be motivated to live his/her life according the the Catholic interpretation of divine law.

 

[comrade1789]

Again…this is a Catholic authority presenting the Catholic position. I’m not saying that the good Father isn’t correct. I’m merely saying that a non-Catholic is likely to be unmoved by an appeal to a Catholic authority, and would most likely not be motivated to live his/her life according the the Catholic interpretation of divine law.

that is irrelevant.

 

[GwenL]

Just because this third marriage is not valid to some Catholics, doesn’t mean it is not valid. It is just not valid to you. But it is valid to near 6 billion people in the world who are not Catholic.
I think a good, refreshing slap of relativism is just what the doctor ordered here! (* Smack, smack!*)

**If you are going to say a protestant marriage is valid, then you must say that a protestant divorce is as well. **Either you are respecting the marriage laws of another religion or you are not.
Which is it?
Or will you Cafeteria-choose?

It will come to this?
That this woman cannot sleep in her own loving mother’s home because her mother follows another religion and their rules?
How wrong it is.

Reference the part that I bolded. Tell me please, how the second phrase follows from the first. I don’t follow your logic. Why must we say that any divorce is valid?

Your supposition is not well thought out. Neither is your relativism. Many Protestant denominations accept abortion as valid. Should we? Some pagan religions accepted human sacrifice. Should we? Most Protestant denominations accept the “marriage” of homosexuals to same-gender partners. Should we? Are all of these things “valid” because some group thinks that they are?

Because something is valid to any number of people doesn’t make it objectively right, or good, or valid.

A protestant marriage is valid when it complies with divine law; that is, when a man and a woman are not already married to another person, or otherwise impeded, they may marry. A Jewish marriage, a pagan marriage, a Christian/pagan marriage, are all the same. One man, one woman, for life, if otherwise unimpeded.

We don’t respect the “marriage laws of another religion.” We respect the marriage laws of God. And He pretty clearly said that one who divorces and marries another commits adultery.

Your final statement is telling. You think that people follow religions and their “rules.” Probably you should do some thinking about the difference between man-made “rules” and the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Church.