Would this marriage be valid?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ArmyofTheImmaculata
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmmā€¦ that doesnā€™t hold for lack of form cases, however, if memory serves.
Third parties donā€™t have any reason to question the validity of someone elseā€™s marriage
Click to expand...
šŸ‘
 
Deacon,

From a canon law perspective, Iā€™ve been taught (by some canon lawyers here on this forum) that the particular canon you cited does not apply to a Catholic who marries outside the Church without dispensation There is NO presumption of validity in such a case.
 
ArmyofTheImmaculata said:
Iā€™m asking this question on behalf two close family members.
Click to expand...
The family members should really talk to their local Catholic priest.
ArmyofTheImmaculata said:
If a baptised Protestant(Church of Scotland) and a baptised Roman Catholic were married in a non-religious ceremony(also not within a church) would their marriage be considered valid or invalid by the Church?
Click to expand...
A Catholic marries validly when they marry in Catholic form or receive a dispensation from form to marry a non-Catholic in a non-Catholic ceremony.

So, we really canā€™t say anything about this particular marriage without knowing the particulars of what the Catholic did or did not do as it pertains to receiving a dispensation from form.

The Catholic should talk to their priest.
 
It depends.

Were the both free to marry?

Did the Catholic party gain proper permission/dispensation from form?
 
Imagine that you are a dual citizen of both your home country AND of Hawkinizonia. Hawkininzonia law requires that Hawkinsonians get a permission form from the Hawkinzonian government in order to marry. By obtaining that permission paper, the personā€™s rights and property in Hawkinzonia is protected. If the person decides to ignore this step, they know that means they give up their rights as a Hawkinsonian and may lose their property there.

Catholics are members of both their country and of the Church. The Church has laws that protect her citizens. We can choose to ignore the marriage laws, but, in doing so, we give up our access to the Sacraments and enter objective grave sin and may lose our home in heaven.
 
As is so often the case, best response, ā€œgo talk to your priest.ā€
 
Chris-Hawkins said:
I dont think God and or Jesus would Judge a Roman Catholic for marrying a Protestant Christian or Vice versa. If they both have a good relationship with God adhere to the 10 commandments and the teachings of Jesus then in the eyes of God why would it not be recognized
Click to expand...
It is not that it is invalid, but that the ceremony would be invalid without certain precautions followed. This can be corrected.
To put it another way, in a secular government, if you just put a ring on someoneā€™s finger and said, ā€œI marry you,ā€ would you actually have been married, or is marriage something that requires a bit more regulations?

Also, it is biblical to keep social cohesion by marrying within the group, but we in fact do allow it to happen anyhow in this new Covenant.
 
Unless the couple prepared for marriage at a Catholic parish, obtained a Dispensation from Canonical Form and Permission for Mixed Religion Marriage from the Catholic bishop of the diocese; and a Permission Letter from the Catholic Partyā€™s pastor, the marriage is most certainly invalid.
 
Last edited:
So if they are seeking a convalidation, they need it.

If they are seeking an annulment(proof of nullity) they need it.

Their marriage is neither recognized nor unrecognized.
 
The issue here would be the form of the marriage. Itā€™s permitted to marry a protestant. But it requires special permission for a Catholic to get married without using the marriage form set out by the Church. Kind of like how in many countries, you arenā€™t married unless you go in front of a judge.

Now, if the Catholic party wants to come back to practicing Catholicism, this is often not hard to fix. The easiest way is a convalidation, which is a way of having both parties affirm their decision to be married, within a Catholic form. Thereā€™s also radical sanation, which sort of functions like retroactively giving the permission needed.

Thatā€™s the very non-technical overview, but hopefully it clears things up!
 
ArmyofTheImmaculata said:
First of all, not everything needs to be explicitly stated in the Bible for it to be Christian. However the Church maintains that in order for a marriage to be a Christian marriage it must be between two properly baptised Christians. Otherwise the marriage is secular and therefore not a valid and sacramental Christian marriage. This question is not a debate about the ā€œtaboo of our-group marriagesā€ it is regarding the validity of a ā€œmarriageā€ between two baptised Christians.

God bless.
Click to expand...
I may be misunderstanding where youā€™re going, but that line isnā€™t necessarily correct. A Catholic can marry a non-baptized atheist (given the correct permission/dispensation is obtained) the marriage would be valid, just not sacramental. It would be considered natural.
 
ArmyofTheImmaculata said:
However the Church maintains that in order for a marriage to be a Christian marriage it must be between two properly baptised Christians. Otherwise the marriage is secular and therefore not a valid and sacramental Christian marriage.
Click to expand...
This isnā€™t entirely correct. Marriage does need to be between two baptized people to be a sacrament. This is true whether the baptized people are Catholics or not.

If a marriage involves one or two unbaptized people, the marriage is called a valid natural marriage.

Validity and sacramentality are two different things.
 
The Church recognizes the marriage of two baptized non-Catholics as valid and sacramental, even if they were married on a cruise line by the captain of the ship. God is still involved in their marriage, whether or not there is a minister or priest observing.

As a side note: The Roman rite considers that the parties are the ministers of the sacrament; the priest is the official observer. In the Eastern rites (at least some, if not all), the sacramental theology considers that the priest administers the sacrament.

And the Church considers any marriage between a non-baptized individual and another (baptized or not) as valid, but not sacramental.
 
God wills the marriages be done in a Temple/Church.
Marriage is a sacrament.
 
Tulitas said:
God wills the marriages be done in a Temple/Church.
Click to expand...
Actually, this is not true. For most of the history of the church, marriages took place in whatever civil form the locals used. There is no church doctrine regarding a wedding taking place in a church. This is disciplinary only, and only within the last few hundred years of the church. And only applies to Catholics subject to canon law.

The Jews did not marry in the Temple or Synangogue in the time of Jesus. They executed a betrothal contract which solidified the marriage and the wedding occurred simply by a procession of the bride into the groomā€™s home.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top