Question re: Non-Practicing Catholic Getting Married

[Phemie]

This does not make sense to me. A Catholic has a right to marry, but a Catholic who wants permission to marry a non-Catholic must promise to raise the children Catholic. If you don’t agree to that, you don’t get the permission, and if you don’t get permission, your marriage will not be valid. Furthermore, even when you exchange vows with a fellow Catholic, you are required to consent to “accept children lovingly from God, and bring them up according to the law of Christ and his Church.” Are you saying that a couple can choose to say “no, I won’t” instead of “yes, I do” on some of their vows, and the marriage will go on fine, anyway?

I can see where you might mean that raising children in the faith might not be listed on some official statement giving the “fundamental goods of marriage”, but I’m talking about practice, not theory. If it is not fundamentally required that a Catholic raise their children Catholic, then how can the Church make that a requirement for permission to marry a person outside the faith? How would adding unnecessary conditions not violate the Catholic’s right to marry? Also, if my husband were to lie on our wedding day, and say later that he never intended to raise our children as he had solemnly and publicly promised he would do, then why would that have no effect on the validity of our marriage?

Are you telling me that as far as validity goes, there are some lies made in the wedding vows that are fatal to the attempt at marriage and some lies that are not? I don’t get it.

The intent to have children, if possible, is required for a valid marriage.

With a mixed-marriage, the Catholic promises to do all in his/her power to have the children baptized in the Catholic Church and raised in the faith, but it does not invalidate the marriage if the Catholic does not follow through. The non-Catholic promises nothing and the Directory on Ecumenism says "At the same time, it should be recognized that the non-Catholic partner may feel a like obligation because of his/her own Christian commitment.

It also says

1. In carrying out this duty of transmitting the Catholic faith to the children, the Catholic parent will do so with respect for the religious freedom and conscience of the other parent and with due regard for the unity and permanence of the marriage and for the maintenance of the communion of the family. If, notwithstanding the Catholic’s best efforts, the children are not baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church, the Catholic parent does not fall subject to the censure of Canon Law. At the same time, his/her obligation to share the Catholic faith with the children does not cease. It continues to make its demands, which could be met, for example, by playing an active part in contributing to the Christian atmosphere of the home; doing all that is possible by word and example to enable the other members of the family to appreciate the specific values of the Catholic tradition; taking whatever steps are necessary to be well informed about his/her own faith so as to be able to explain and discuss it with them; praying with the family for the grace of Christian unity as the Lord wills it.

 

[EasterJoy]

The intent to have children, if possible, is required for a valid marriage.

With a mixed-marriage, the Catholic promises to do all in his/her power to have the children baptized in the Catholic Church and raised in the faith, but it does not invalidate the marriage if the Catholic does not follow through. The non-Catholic promises nothing and the Directory on Ecumenism says "At the same time, it should be recognized that the non-Catholic partner may feel a like obligation because of his/her own Christian commitment.

It also says

To get back to the topic of this thread: Does it invalidate the marriage if the Catholic seeking a dispensation demonstrably never had any intention of following through on the promise to try to raise the children Catholic when he/she asked for a dispensation, as would be the case described by the OP?

If you lie in order to get the dispensation, is the dispensation valid?

 

[Sarabande]

Just an update. I have spoken with my friend about all discussed here and let her read the thread. With the exception of post #5 which she found completely off the mark towards her family and to myself (she requested that I mention that), she did appreciate the rest of the responses.

After talking, reading the thread responses and thinking more about it, she is still going to go through with not getting married in the Church because of her lack of belief in the religion and Church itself and her agnosticism. She isn’t interested in speaking with a priest, because she believes that nothing will change her mind at the moment. This is where she is right now.

Thank you all, again, for your help and wisdom and especially for your prayers. She is a special person in my life… like a little sister to me. God bless.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

This does not make sense to me. A Catholic has a right to marry, but a Catholic who wants permission to marry a non-Catholic must promise to raise the children Catholic. If you don’t agree to that, you don’t get the permission, and if you don’t get permission, your marriage will not be valid.

Permission is needed for the sacrament to be licit, it does not effect validity. Even if the priest never seeks the official permission from the bishop’s office the marriage is still valid.

Furthermore, even when you exchange vows with a fellow Catholic, you are required to consent to “accept children lovingly from God, and bring them up according to the law of Christ and his Church.” Are you saying that a couple can choose to say “no, I won’t” instead of “yes, I do” on some of their vows, and the marriage will go on fine, anyway?

Its not an essential good of marriage, otherwise no Protestant marriage would ever be valid. However, yes, a priest would most likely refuse to marry a couple that defiantly states they will not raise their children Catholic. But if they lie, its still a valid sacrament.

Also, if my husband were to lie on our wedding day, and say later that he never intended to raise our children as he had solemnly and publicly promised he would do, then why would that have no effect on the validity of our marriage?

The lie, in and of itself, would have no effect on the validity of the marriage. Once again, if its essential to the sacrament then no marriage between 2 Protestants would ever be valid. However, the lie could be symptomatic of another issue that could be grounds for an annulment.

Are you telling me that as far as validity goes, there are some lies made in the wedding vows that are fatal to the attempt at marriage and some lies that are not?

Correct.

 

[EasterJoy]

Permission is needed for the sacrament to be licit, it does not effect validity. Even if the priest never seeks the official permission from the bishop’s office the marriage is still valid.

Its not an essential good of marriage, otherwise no Protestant marriage would ever be valid. However, yes, a priest would most likely refuse to marry a couple that defiantly states they will not raise their children Catholic. But if they lie, its still a valid sacrament.

The lie, in and of itself, would have no effect on the validity of the marriage. Once again, if its essential to the sacrament then no marriage between 2 Protestants would ever be valid. However, the lie could be symptomatic of another issue that could be grounds for an annulment.

Correct.

That makes total sense. I always learn something new from you! Thank you!