Why is a Baptized Catholic obligated to marry in the Catholic Church?

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Willing_Spirit

Active member
Why is someone obligated to marry in the Church because of Baptism, regardless of how little they were raised in the faith afterwards?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right, but the thing is even if they don’t know that they’re Catholic they are still bound. Imagine I was baptized Catholic as a baby. My parents never took me back to the church. I was provided with no religious education. As an adult, I had a conversion experience and joined a protestant church. I get married in the protestant church. I’m now objectively fornicating, living in an objectively invalid marriage… and I have no clue and never will… that doesn’t seem fair or just. And no, it’s not a matter of divine law… it’s a matter of Church law. The Council of Trent bound Catholics to marry in the Church… prior to Trent, Catholics could validly, though illicitly, marry in a civil ceremony. The Church could change this requirement tomorrow… it would still be illicit to marry outside of the Church, but at least these couples wouldn’t be living in a perpetual state of fornication… it seems to me it would be an act of mercy.
 
Last edited:
I would make a distinction between someone who rejects the Catholic Faith and marries outside of the Church in deliberate disregard for that the Church teaches and someone who through no fault of their own is brought up outside of the Church. This issue for the second category of people is really a technicality rather than a sin. Remember, it is not up to us to sit in judgement of the other people.
 
How can you even know for sure if you were baptised?

Suppose a little baby is found, and its origin cannot be traced, but it is brought up by a non Catholic family. And quite unknown to anybody, including the child iteslf, it had validly been baptised before being abandoned or lost.

Doesn’t the Church have something here where they say they don’t know but they assume? I’m pretty sure I heard or read that somewhere?
 
If a valid Baptism of a person is not known of, with certainty, the Church can move forward with baptizing the person “conditionally”: If the person was baptized before, the (new) ceremony was not a/another Baptism; if the person was not previously baptized, the ceremony was a valid Baptism. Here, they “don’t know”, but do something that covers both possibilities. Is that maybe what you were thinking of?
 
Willing_Spirit said:
Why is someone obligated to marry in the Church because of Baptism, regardless of how little they were raised in the faith afterwards?
Click to expand...
Many people very sadly fit that description: baptized Catholic, zero formation in the Faith. The requirement of the Church is actually the best possible way the Church can help the couple, if the couple then begins to look into this Church they know nothing about, and begin to learn all the treasures of the Catholic Faith, and then return to this great gift of God to humanity, His Holy Church.

A marriage formed and centered and grounded in the Truth of the Catholic Faith is the BEST assurance a couple can have for the best of all marriages together: a marriage in the Truth of God, joined in the love of Jesus Christ.
 
fide said:
If a valid Baptism of a person is not known of, with certainty, the Church can move forward with baptizing the person “conditionally”: If the person was baptized before, the (new) ceremony was not a/another Baptism; if the person was not previously baptized, the ceremony was a valid Baptism. Here, they “don’t know”, but do something that covers both possibilities. Is that maybe what you were thinking of?
Click to expand...
yes, I think that’s what I was thinking of.
 
I don’t think there is a difference between validity and licity when it comes to marriage. A valid marriage outside the Church is also licit. I think the Catholic Church even regards the marriage between Baptized Protestants as sacramental.
 
Imagine there is another country, Sweetlandia. When you were an infant, your parents gave you the gift of citizenship in Sweetlandia, so, you have dual citizenship of your birthland and this other country.

You decide to get married. Your country has certain laws about marriage, as does Sweetlandia. You and your spouse decide to ignore the laws of Sweetlandia and only follow your birth country laws.

Then, you and your spouse want to buy property in Sweetlandia so you can be part of the most beautiful place on earth. It is only available to citizens. Then, wait! Sweetlandia does not recognize your marriage because their laws were ignored, so, even though you had ignored Sweetlandia for all of these years, and you have citizenship, you must regularize your marriage before you can exercise that citizenship.

When we are Baptized, we become dual citizens of both the secular world and of the Kindom of God.
 
What I struggle with is the fact that Sweetlandia embraces all of the other marriages taking place in your birth country, except for yours just because you are a citizen. People from Sweetlandia can wish everyone else in your birth country a happy anniversary each year except for you unless you come back and get married in Sweetlandia.
 
The Church does not forbid me from wishing anyone “Happy Anniversary”, even if they are in an irregular marriage. The Church embraces every person. I am so sorry if people have been less than Christlike in your experiences 😦

It is tragic that some parents do not understand that Catholic Baptism means something real, it is not just a nice ceremony to make Aunt Susie happy.
 
Even if the Church doesn’t forbid it, wouldn’t it be disingenuous and misleading to acknowledge an invalid marriage by wishing a happy anniversary?
 
Anniversary is how we mark important milestones in our lives. That two people share this important milestone is reason enough for me to raise a glass to them.
 
Not arguing with your point here, but civil wedding ceremonies were not really a thing in the 16th century and before.
 
Last edited:
It would be an odd country indeed if you had to be married in order to exercise your citizenship…
 
One of the things necessary for a sacrament to be valid is to intend to do what the Church does. The Church requires “canonical form” for validity from a Catholic because choosing not to enter into matrimony according to the Church’s rites and disciplines manifestly demonstrates an intent to not do what the Church does.
 
tuffsmurf said:
if you had to be married in order to exercise your citizenship
Click to expand...
Except that wasn’t what was said. What was said was that your marriage had to be according to Sweetlandia’s law to be recognized by Sweetlandia since you are a citizen, and that since you chose to marry it must be so recognized before exercising the other aspects of citizenship, such as buying real property.
Willing_Spirit said:
What I struggle with is the fact that Sweetlandia embraces all of the other marriages taking place in your birth country, except for yours just because you are a citizen.
Click to expand...
Why? All they are saying is that our law applies to all of our citizens, but it does not apply to those who are not our citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top