Protestant Marriage

[steido01]

Not true. I married my Catholic husband 20 years ago. We had the ceremony in the LCMS church, however we went through all of the pre-marriage stuff required of us by the Catholic church, including meeting with a priest numerous times, who then gave us the blessing and told us that the church would view my LCMS pastor as performing the marriage in place of the priest, just the same as if we had been married in the Catholic church.

Well, shoot.

Wish I would’ve known that before I married my Roman Catholic wife. My father is a Missouri Synod pastor, and it would’ve meant so much to my wife and me had he been the one to preside over the ceremony. As it was, I was the only one of his children whose ceremony he didn’t officiate.

Side note - I’m still thankful for the time our Roman Catholic priest spent discussing the biblical expectations of husband and wife in marriage. LCMS pastors also typically require pre-marriage counseling, and it’s a great thing. Although the Lutheran versions focus more on how to live a Christian marriage, and less on archaic and offensive questions like, “Have you ever slept with your mother-in-law-to-be?” That one still irks me, Vatican.

 

[Hockeygurl]

So, sorry to hear that. Our Catholic Priest even mentioned that some couples choose to have a Co-officiator (Both Catholic and Lutheran) if both parties are very attached to their respective Pastor/Priest…although we agreed it was not necessary in our case.

I don’t remember any of the probing questions as you mentioned… I do however remember balking a little bit at signing the paper that says I would do my best to raise my children Catholic. My husband told me just to sign it anyway, as I could always change my mind later (Bad Catholic). However, I reconciled that we would raise our children with exposure to both faiths… (so I didn’t really Lie…)

 

[steido01]

So, sorry to hear that. Our Catholic Priest even mentioned that some couples choose to have a Co-officiator (Both Catholic and Lutheran) if both parties are very attached to their respective Pastor/Priest…although we agreed it was not necessary in our case.

Well, our Missouri Synod Lutheran pastors could never ‘robe up’ or co-officiate with a Roman Catholic priest because our communions do not share pulpit/altar fellowship – it would appear unionistic or syncretistic. So that option was out from the get-go.

I don’t remember any of the probing questions as you mentioned.

It was a long, embarrassing and invasive questionnaire administered by the priest at one of our first meetings. I wish I could find those questions online. There’s no way around it - the questions were downright offensive.

I do however remember balking a little bit at signing the paper that says I would do my best to raise my children Catholic. My husband told me just to sign it anyway, as I could always change my mind later (Bad Catholic). However, I reconciled that we would raise our children with exposure to both faiths… (so I didn’t really Lie…)

This was a long sticking point for me too… until the priest explained that ‘the best of our ability’ might not necessarily mean within the Roman communion. My children, no matter how they are raised, will be raised catholic.

 

[1ke]

archaic and offensive questions like, “Have you ever slept with your mother-in-law-to-be?” That one still irks me, Vatican.

That is not in any premarital investigation form I have ever seen including all of the ones I file as sacramental recordkeeper, and the one my spouse and I completed, nor any I have ever seen online.

I don’t know why someone would ask you such a question.

 

[1ke]

Our Catholic Priest even mentioned that some couples choose to have a Co-officiator (Both Catholic and Lutheran) if both parties are very attached to their respective Pastor/Priest…

That is not permitted under Canon Law. So, don’t know why your priest would say that.

 

[steido01]

That is not permitted under Canon Law. So, don’t know why your priest would say that.

Hmm… I don’t know canon law, but I do know that the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis does allow - and in many cases, encourages this practice.

 

[1ke]

Hmm… I don’t know canon law, but I do know that the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis does allow - and in many cases, encourages this practice.

Co-officiating is prohibited. I don’t know what to tell you about what you may have witnessed in specific diocese.

Can.* 1127 §1. The prescripts of ⇒ can. 1108 are to be observed for the form to be used in a mixed marriage.

§2. If grave diYculties hinder the observance of canonical form, the local ordinary of the Catholic party has the right of dispensing from the form in individual cases, after having consulted the ordinary of the place in which the marriage is celebrated and with some public form of celebration for validity. It is for the conference of bishops to establish norms by which the aforementioned dispensation is to be granted in a uniform manner.

§3. It is forbidden to have another religious celebration of the same marriage to give or renew matrimonial consent before or after the canonical celebration according to the norm of §1. **Likewise, there is not to be a religious celebration in which the Catholic who is assisting and a non-Catholic minister together, using their own rites, ask for the consent of the parties.
**

Perhaps you have seen a priest attend a marriage in which the Catholic has received a dispensation from form-- maybe do a reading or say a prayer. That is not co-officiating. Or likewise, a protestant minister might be invited to do a reading (he cannot participate in the liturgy in any other capacity) or say a prayer/blessing at the reception. That is also not co-officiating.

But, if they both attempt act in a ministerial capacity then that is a serious violation of the Church’s law.

 

[steido01]

Co-officiating is prohibited. I don’t know what to tell you about what you may have witnessed in specific diocese.

…

Perhaps you have seen a priest attend a marriage in which the Catholic has received a dispensation from form-- maybe do a reading or say a prayer. That is not co-officiating. Or likewise, a protestant minister might be invited to do a reading (he cannot participate in the liturgy in any other capacity) or say a prayer/blessing at the reception. That is also not co-officiating.

But, if they both attempt act in a ministerial capacity then that is a serious violation of the Church’s law.

Hey, I’m with you. My Lutheran synod also forbids co-officiating, because it appears (and is) unionistic. I also understand the distinction between participating in a service hosted by one or the other, and co-officiating.

What I’m referring to is regarding some sort of ‘covenantal agreement’ (whatever that means ) between the Archdiocese of St. Paul & Minneapolis and the ELCA. The wording is wishy-washy enough, but I’ve seen clergy from both denominations robe up together for wedding services. Even if only one or the other is leading the service, it sure appears like an affirmation of the other’s beliefs.
archspm.org/reference/ecumenical-guides-detail.php?intResourceID=146

 

[steido01]

That is not in any premarital investigation form I have ever seen including all of the ones I file as sacramental recordkeeper, and the one my spouse and I completed, nor any I have ever seen online.

I don’t know why someone would ask you such a question.

The diocese we were married in doesn’t post their form online, but I did find the exact wording on another diocese’s website:

Were you ever married to or did you ever cohabit with your intended spouse’s mother or daughter?

I understand (and completely agree with!) the need for a proper investigation before permitting a marriage to take place - but really?

 

[1ke]

I understand (and completely agree with!) the need for a proper investigation before permitting a marriage to take place - but really?

That is not the same question as “did you have sex with…” Marriage or cohabitation with someone in the direct line is an impediment to valid marriage. All impediments to valid marriage must be reviewed.

Having been married to someone in the direct line creates the bond of affinity:

Can.* 1092 Affinity in the direct line in any degree invalidates a marriage.

Having cohabited with someone in the direct line, outside a valid marriage, creates the impediment of public propriety:

Can.* 1093 The impediment of public propriety arises from an invalid marriage after the establishment of common life or from notorious or public concubinage. It nullifies marriage in the first degree of the direct line between the man and the blood relatives of the woman, and vice versa.

 

[1ke]

What I’m referring to is regarding some sort of ‘covenantal agreement’ (whatever that means ) between the Archdiocese of St. Paul & Minneapolis and the ELCA. The wording is wishy-washy enough, but I’ve seen clergy from both denominations robe up together for wedding services.

What you have seen notwithstanding, the document you linked to does not state co-officiating. It actually states the opposite. The one in whose denomination the marriage takes place witnesses the vows.

The other clergy are invited to participate-- as I mentioned, perhaps a reading, a prayer, etc. If they go beyond that, they are not in line with Church teaching.

I can’t speak for those who might disobey Church law. I can only speak to what the law is.

 

[Peebo]

Hmmm…If Protestant marriages are recognized as being valid and/or sacramental by the Catholic Church because of their church teaching…what if one…or even both were previously married and had remarried because their church allows divorce and remarriage…and then both decide to become Catholics…does their valid and/or sacramental marriage then become invalid and they are both adulterers because we Catholics don’t allow divorce and remarriage

 

[SyroMalankara]

Hmmm…If Protestant marriages are recognized as being valid and/or sacramental by the Catholic Church because of their church teaching…what if one…or even both were previously married and had remarried because their church allows divorce and remarriage…and then both decide to become Catholics…does their valid and/or sacramental marriage then become invalid and they are both adulterers because we Catholics don’t allow divorce and remarriage

Non-Catholic marriages of Baptized Christians are recognized as valid and sacramental by Catholic teaching, not due to the other denomination, or no denomination or the court. Non-Catholic marriages of non-baptized are recognized as “natural” but not sacramental.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Hmmm…If Protestant marriages are recognized as being valid and/or sacramental by the Catholic Church because of their church teaching…what if one…or even both were previously married and had remarried because their church allows divorce and remarriage…and then both decide to become Catholics…does their valid and/or sacramental marriage then become invalid and they are both adulterers because we Catholics don’t allow divorce and remarriage

People who are divorced and remarried and then want to become Catholic must submit their previous marriage(s) to a Tribunal and deal with that before being received into the Catholic Church.

Keep in mind that a valid marriage may have taken place even if they were not members of any church community at the time and even if they were married at city hall.

This is one of the most difficult problems I face with RCIA since marriage issues can cause delays for people who are very eager to become Catholic. It’s sad for everyone involved.

 

[1ke]

Hmmm…If Protestant marriages are recognized as being valid and/or sacramental by the Catholic Church because of their church teaching…

That is not the basis of the Catholic Church’s recognition of non-Catholic marriage.

what if one…or even both were previously married and had remarried because their church allows divorce and remarriage…and then both decide to become Catholics…

Their prior bonds would have to be examined for validity or nullity. They could not enter the Church until their marital situation is resolved.

does their valid and/or sacramental marriage then become invalid and they are both adulterers because we Catholics don’t allow divorce and remarriage

If their first marriage(s) were valid, they do not have a valid or sacramental marriage. Prior bond is an impediment to valid marriage.

If their first marriage(s) are found to be invalid through the Catholic marriage tribunal, then their current marriage is valid.

 

[Peebo]

People who are divorced and remarried and then want to become Catholic must submit their previous marriage(s) to a Tribunal and deal with that before being received into the Catholic Church.

Keep in mind that a valid marriage may have taken place even if they were not members of any church community at the time and even if they were married at city hall.

This is one of the most difficult problems I face with RCIA since marriage issues can cause delays for people who are very eager to become Catholic. It’s sad for everyone involved.

Thanks for clearing that up…I assume they would need to get any previous marriage(s) annulled…I don’t envy anyone involved in the process

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Thanks for clearing that up…I assume they would need to get any previous marriage(s) annulled…I don’t envy anyone involved in the process

“Annulment” is the common term though it’s actually a declaration of nullity, a finding that there was no valid marriage in place. It’s the same process as for a Catholic who wishes to get married after a divorce.

 

[steido01]

What you have seen notwithstanding, the document you linked to does not state co-officiating. It actually states the opposite. The one in whose denomination the marriage takes place witnesses the vows.

The other clergy are invited to participate-- as I mentioned, perhaps a reading, a prayer, etc. If they go beyond that, they are not in line with Church teaching.

I can’t speak for those who might disobey Church law. I can only speak to what the law is.

Understood. Thank you for the clarifications. Care to make a guess at what I might’ve seen, then? I’m not sure if it was ‘legal’ and poorly explained/executed, or simply against canon law from the get-go. I just don’t see how both clergy could’ve robed up together.