When is a Non-Catholic Marriage considered as Sacramental by Catholics?

[1ke]

A non-Roman Catholic Marriage may very well fit the ideals of procreation and the unitive-function, fulfilling 100% and more what is a mandatory in the One, True, Roman Catholic, & Apostolic Church for the Sacrament Of Matrimony, although it is still not superior and cleansed in nature as a Marriage under the Roman Catholic Church would be.

This is 100% not true.

Two baptized persons who are not Catholic and have never been Catholic and never become Catholic have a sacramental marriage juts like a Catholic. It’s the SAME.

 

[Ilroy]

A non-Roman Catholic Marriage may very well fit the ideals of procreation and the unitive-function, fulfilling 100% and more what is a mandatory in the One, True, Roman Catholic, & Apostolic Church for the Sacrament Of Matrimony, although it is still not superior and cleansed in nature as a Marriage under the Roman Catholic Church would be.

Please, before you post what you think are Catholic teachings here any more, do some serious study of our Catholic Faith.
One thing that stands out hugely is your constant reference to the western Church or the Roman Catholic Church or the Latin Church being the only true one etc.
FYI - It is the Catholic Church that is the one started by Christ. That encompasses many rites all in communion with the Pope who is the Bishop of Rome, among other titles. Most of the rites, although smaller than the Latin rite, are from the east, hence the Eastern Catholic Rites in the Church.

most of your other assertions are in partial or complete error as to the actual teachings of the Catholic Church.

Here is a link to the Catechism so you can learn what Holy Mother Church really teaches:
usccb.org/catechism/text/

 

[Etruschi]

This is 100% not true.

Two baptized persons who are not Catholic and have never been Catholic and never become Catholic have a sacramental marriage juts like a Catholic. It’s the SAME.

I beg to greatly differ with you on this! If we are conversing of the Baptized, say for instance that two Methodists for example, never being Catholic, obviously not being currently Catholic, and never to become Catholic, contract a Marriage with one another. Their Matrimony, whilst still being “Christian” in the eyes of the Methodist Church and amongst society, and even being joined together in the name Ofof Jesus, inevitably lacks profoundly the true authentic standard and sanctifying grace of a Roman Catholic Matrimony. Why is this one might enquire? Well, I will tell you why! The two Methodists are conjoined in Marriage by the invocation of “Sacrament.” Sacraments, all Seven Sacraments which are from God, come-down from Saint Peter, Apostle. It was Saint Peter, Apostle, the “Rock,” the “Pillar Of The Church” to Whom the Messiah handed the Keys Of The Kingdom to and, yes, the Marital Sacrament. Jesus Christ Instituted the Matrimonial Sacrament whilst here walking upon the Earth, and thus Saint Peter was established by Him as His Chief Apostle and Disciple, rendering unto Him the Sacrament Of Marriage. Whilst a non-Latin Catholic “Christian” Matrimony still adheres to atleast a few of the original, intended, Created, Divinely Instituted standards, outside of being a purely legal engagement, it never the less lacks it’s actual and rightful origin as Instituted by Christ Jesus and handed to Saint Peter, Apostle, descended to the Pope.

 

[Etruschi]

Please, before you post what you think are Catholic teachings here any more, do some serious study of our Catholic Faith.
One thing that stands out hugely is your constant reference to the western Church or the Roman Catholic Church or the Latin Church being the only true one etc.
FYI - It is the Catholic Church that is the one started by Christ. That encompasses many rites all in communion with the Pope who is the Bishop of Rome, among other titles. Most of the rites, although smaller than the Latin rite, are from the east, hence the Eastern Catholic Rites in the Church.

most of your other assertions are in partial or complete error as to the actual teachings of the Catholic Church.

Here is a link to the Catechism so you can learn what Holy Mother Church really teaches:
usccb.org/catechism/text/

Dear one,
What I say here does not in the very least bit contradict Official Magisterial Ecclesiastical Teachings. Yes the One and Only, True Church is the One, Holy, Roman, Catholic, & Apostolic - Christian Church;
Latin Church,
Western Church,
Roman Church,
Church Of Rome,
Universal Church.
(These being all synonyms).
Also too, the Christian Church, for It is the Only Christian Church, the one Communion Of Saints, and anything extra to It is “anathema,” it is “ex-communicated.” What you say concerning the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches is perfectly in line however. Though they are orientally located and have a distinct, but related set of Rituals and Rites to the Western Church, those congregations are never the less one with the Bishop Of Rome and Universal Church, therefore owing alligiance and submission to Roman authority, for Rome is where the primal Pope reinged from and where Jesus Willed the seat of His Government to be. As far as the remark from another member that the Bible is somehow not explicitely clear the One, True, Holy, Roman Catholic, & Apostolic - Christian Church is as such, perhaps a tad-bit of Scriptural study and Christian historical and Magisterial investigation will clear this up for you. The Book Of Saint Matthew couldn’t be more clear of this in and of Itself, let alone looking at Christian anthology and Magisterial Documentations.

 

[1ke]

I beg to greatly differ with you on this! If we are conversing of the Baptized, say for instance that two Methodists for example, never being Catholic, obviously not being currently Catholic, and never to become Catholic, contract a Marriage with one another. Their Matrimony, whilst still being “Christian” in the eyes of the Methodist Church and amongst society, and even being joined together in the name Ofof Jesus, inevitably lacks profoundly the true authentic standard and sanctifying grace of a Roman Catholic Matrimony. Why is this one might enquire? Well, I will tell you why! The two Methodists are conjoined in Marriage by the invocation of “Sacrament.” Sacraments, all Seven Sacraments which are from God, come-down from Saint Peter, Apostle. It was Saint Peter, Apostle, the “Rock,” the “Pillar Of The Church” to Whom the Messiah handed the Keys Of The Kingdom to and, yes, the Marital Sacrament. Jesus Christ Instituted the Matrimonial Sacrament whilst here walking upon the Earth, and thus Saint Peter was established by Him as His Chief Apostle and Disciple, rendering unto Him the Sacrament Of Marriage. Whilst a non-Latin Catholic “Christian” Matrimony still adheres to atleast a few of the original, intended, Created, Divinely Instituted standards, outside of being a purely legal engagement, it never the less lacks it’s actual and rightful origin as Instituted by Christ Jesus and handed to Saint Peter, Apostle, descended to the Pope.

This is not true.

The bride and groom confer the Sacrament, not the priest.

Therefore, any baptized couple who marry enter into a Sacrament when they marry by virtue of their consent.
**
That is what the Catholic Church teaches. **

 

[Etruschi]

Naturally the bride and groom confer the Rite upon one another in the Presence of God, but in order for the exchange of vows to be valid there must be a presiding of a Roman Catholic Priest or Deacon.

 

[Ilroy]

Dear one,
What I say here does not in the very least bit contradict Official Magisterial Ecclesiastical Teachings. Yes the One and Only, True Church is the One, Holy, Roman, Catholic, & Apostolic - Christian Church;
Latin Church,
Western Church,
Roman Church,
Church Of Rome,
Universal Church.
(These being all synonyms).
Also too, the Christian Church, for It is the Only Christian Church, the one Communion Of Saints, and anything extra to It is “anathema,” it is “ex-communicated.” What you say concerning the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches is perfectly in line however. Though they are orientally located and have a distinct, but related set of Rituals and Rites to the Western Church, those congregations are never the less one with the Bishop Of Rome and Universal Church, therefore owing alligiance and submission to Roman authority, for Rome is where the primal Pope reinged from and where Jesus Willed the seat of His Government to be. As far as the remark from another member that the Bible is somehow not explicitely clear the One, True, Holy, Roman Catholic, & Apostolic - Christian Church is as such, perhaps a tad-bit of Scriptural study and Christian historical and Magisterial investigation will clear this up for you. The Book Of Saint Matthew couldn’t be more clear of this in and of Itself, let alone looking at Christian anthology and Magisterial Documentations.

Nice bit of flowery language for a whole lot of misinformation. Listen, people come here looking for true authentic teaching on our Catholic Church. What you are giving is doing nothing but confuse folks. It’s no wonder so many non-Catholics have such distorted views of what Holy Mother Church actually teaches as given to us by Christ though His apostles.

FYI - Roman Catholic is a pejorative term given to us by the church of England after Henry split away.

The Latin Catholic Church is just one of more than 20 Rites within the Catholic Church. yes, the Pope is the Bishop of Rome, among other duties, but the Catholic Church is Universal, not simply Roman…

Please, Please, Please, I beg you to learn your faith much more deeply before you comtinue misleading folks as to our Church’s teachings. I know you probably mean well, but you’re just not getting so many things correct…

 

[1ke]

Naturally the bride and groom confer the Rite upon one another in the Presence of God, but in order for the exchange of vows to be valid there must be a presiding of a Roman Catholic Priest or Deacon.

That is not true for non-Catholics.

Only Catholics are bound by canon law to the Catholic form of marriage with a priest or deacon as witness.

 

[Etruschi]

I really do not comprehend your division with me on this matter and how in contradicts Official Magisterial Church Teachings, as it doesn’t. Yes, the Universal Church is what It is, the Universal Church and all that are under Papal jurisdiction. But the Church is also “Roman” for this, Rome, is where the Church was established, developed, and out-grew from out of the Roman Empire, and the sacred language of the Church is and has always been “Latin.” I do hope when you mentioned “Eastern” congregations that were only referring to the “Eastern” Catholic Rite and not to “Eastern” Orthodoxy at all, for the Eastern Communion is illegitimate and “anathema” without a doubt!

 

[Ilroy]

I really do not comprehend your division with me on this matter and how in contradicts Official Magisterial Church Teachings, as it doesn’t. Yes, the Universal Church is what It is, the Universal Church and all that are under Papal jurisdiction. But the Church is also “Roman” for this, Rome, is where the Church was established, developed, and out-grew from out of the Roman Empire, and the sacred language of the Church is and has always been “Latin.” I do hope when you mentioned “Eastern” congregations that were only referring to the “Eastern” Catholic Rite and not to “Eastern” Orthodoxy at all, for the Eastern Communion is illegitimate and “anathema” without a doubt!

Simply that you keep saying the Latin Catholic or Roman Catholic etc. is the only one and true Church. That is simply not true. The CATHOLIC Church is the true Church and that encompasses more than just the Latin Rite of the Church.
Yes, I know full well that Eastern Orthodox are not in communion with the Pope…that’s why I referred to the Eastern Rite Catholics, not Eastern Orthodox. And they are Rites, not congregations…

Rome is NOT where the Church was established…try Jerusulem…and Peter was in Antioch long before he stepped foot in Rome…Rome is simply where the Pope is but the Church is NOT properly called the Roman Catholic Church. This was not even a term in use until after the 16th century and it was used as a put down…
Also, Latin is not the sacred language of the Catholic Church and has not always been so…it is the language of the Latin Rite, but the other Rites have other languages. Greek was in use long before Latin became widely used…hence the NT was mostly written in Greek…hmmm Latin always the official language? Nope…

Now, this is straying off topic, so for the answers you have given as to the sacramentality and/or validity of various examples of marriages, much of what you put forth is incorrect. Please study the catechism to set yourself straight in this and all other areas.

My points and the points of others here are that you are spreading misinformation and you need to study the faith and history more before you continue…

Peace be to you…

 

[Etruschi]

I did not ever intend to get in an argument with you, so I hope you didn’t take it this way either and that we are not. Certainly other eastern cities and Provinces were visited by the Apostles prior to Rome, but Rome was the Divine intention and aim for the Christian Church by God. Christianity was founded in Roman Judaea absolutely, but apart from this what I meant was that Rome was where the Papacy was established for It’s Succession following the Papal apointing of Saint Peter, Apostle. Surely though, Greek is by no means, either in lingistic or cultural terms, what the Church is about nor has it ever been just because it was spoken by early Christian communities in the eastern Roman Empire and continues to be by Eastern Rite Catholics. Latin, linguistically and culturally, is and always has been the essence and intention in the Church, and prayers and Masses carried-out in Latin implements a profusion of sanctity and holiness to them, the very reason that voiding Latin from the Mass of the Church is a tragic error and cannot be condoned. As for the Eastern Rite Catholicism, I don’t believe I made my opinion very clear on that. Yes it is submitted to Apostolic & Papal Successions and is conjoined to the Roman Church, but under no circumstances is it equivalent to or even approaching to the validity and authentic Christianity of Roman Catholicism, and therefore cannot be properly rendered as actual “Catholicism” nor “Christianity.” Everything must be in line for this: Papacy, Apostolic Succession, Latinization, etc. Christianity is not justified in fragmented bits and pieces.

 

[Ilroy]

As for the Eastern Rite Catholicism, I don’t believe I made my opinion very clear on that. Yes it is submitted to Apostolic & Papal Successions and is conjoined to the Roman Church, but under no circumstances is it equivalent to or even approaching to the validity and authentic Christianity of Roman Catholicism, and therefore cannot be properly rendered as actual “Catholicism” nor "Christianity." Everything must be in line for this: Papacy, Apostolic Succession, Latinization, etc. Christianity is not justified in fragmented bits and pieces.

All I can say to this is WOW!!! You really have alot to learn about the truths of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church are completely and fully as valid and authentic and the Latin Rite.
You seem to me to be either straying very close to the SSPXers, or are one yourself…
I’m done with this conversation on this thread as it is far off topic…please learn the errors of your thinking and work to correct them…

 

[Etruschi]

All I can say to this is WOW!!! You really have alot to learn about the truths of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church are completely and fully as valid and authentic and the Latin Rite.
You seem to me to be either straying very close to the SSPXers, or are one yourself…
I’m done with this conversation on this thread as it is far off topic…please learn the errors of your thinking and work to correct them…

Well I am sorry to that things got out of hand. Of course the Eastern Catholics call themselves “Catholics” and are indeed under Papal submition, but by keeping their distinct identification and variances in teaching, as they most certainly to not hold each and every article of faith proclaimed by the Church’s Official Magisterial Teaching, they prevent themselves from communing with full truth, the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[jmcrae]

Naturally the bride and groom confer the Rite upon one another in the Presence of God, but in order for the exchange of vows to be valid there must be a presiding of a Roman Catholic Priest or Deacon.

Only for Catholics.

Please, read the Catechism before you make a total fool of yourself - your teachings are in complete contradiction to those of the One True and Holy Faith that you are professing to uphold.

 

[Etruschi]

As a closing to our prolonged and off-topic conversation concerning the Sacramentality of Holy Matrimony, I wished in the end to address and clarify the condemnation I voiced in regards to the Eastern Rite Catholics. Naturally, no one can give any such official pronouncements on such related matters, including myself, for this only the Bishop Of Rome is eligible to do. Further, no I am not an SSPX. While I hold 100% traditionalist and orthodox theology and belief-system, I am one with Vatican Council II. But to address my standing in referration to Eastern Rite Catholics, we have here a sect that is objectively a product and child of the apostate East-West Schism, and even while re-submitting to ties with the Pope, obstinately refuse outright to commit total communion, both in culture and in practice, to the Western Latin Rite Church.

 

[Etruschi]

Only for Catholics.

Please, read the Catechism before you make a total fool of yourself - your teachings are in complete contradiction to those of the One True and Holy Faith that you are professing to uphold.

Yes this is true only for “Catholics” in religious and political standards as you say. But a non-“Catholic” Marriage is not a proprly consecrated one.

 

[jmcrae]

Yes this is true only for “Catholics” in religious and political standards as you say. But a non-“Catholic” Marriage is not a proprly consecrated one.

When married non-Catholics convert to the Catholic faith, they are never required to get re-married in the Church - the reason is that the teaching of the Church is that all first-time marriages lawfully contracted are, in fact, valid “as-is” - that is to say, they are “properly consecrated.”

I think perhaps you have confused the rules for Catholics (who must be married in a Catholic Church building with a Catholic priest presiding, in order to be validly married) with the rules for non-Catholics (who are not bound by the laws of the Church with regard to marriage).

Please read the Catechism and educate yourself on these matters before attempting to teach others - at present, your teachings are worse than useless, since they will cause alarm and confusion where there is no need for it.

 

[Etruschi]

Rules and regulations are not presented always as strict as is the normal scheme of things. My teaching proceeds simply from the truth that blatantly there is One, True, Holy, Roman Catholic, & Apostolic Church, “outside of which there is no salvation.” “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.”

“It is necessary for salvation that all the faithful of Christ be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”_
V Lateran Council III (Bull Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII)

 

[jmcrae]

Rules and regulations are not presented always as strict as is the normal scheme of things. My teaching proceeds simply from the truth that blatantly there is One, True, Holy, Roman Catholic, & Apostolic Church, “outside of which there is no salvation.” “Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus.”

“It is necessary for salvation that all the faithful of Christ be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”_
V Lateran Council III (Bull Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII)

I have no idea what this has to do with the topic of the thread.

Again - please just read the Catechism on the subject of the Sacrament of Marriage. We aren’t a “make it up as you go” religion. We are not allowed to teach anything contrary to the Catechism (regardless of how good or how loyal it sounds) - because, as you have pointed out, we are all subjects of the Roman Pontiff. We cannot bind what he has loosed, nor loose what he has bound.

 

[Etruschi]

My Reply says what it says. I do not fly against the Catechism Of The Catholic Church nor Official Magisterial Ecclesial Teachings, for both are comprised of 2,000 years of antholoy. I meant that the Church is the true home for this Sacrament.