What does it mean to have a valkd but non sacramental marriage

If a baptized Catholic receives the dispensation to marry a non baptized Christian the marriage is seen as valid but non sacramental. What exactly does this wording mean? Does it confer no graces?

There well may be graces, but the basic difference is that is a natural marriage has primarily natural ends in view, while a supernatural marriage has primarily supernatural ends in view. They are simply different in their essences and in their orientation, and sacramental marriages are a more full participation in Christ and in His Church on account of their being rooted in baptism, and because of their ultimate goal of aiding the spouses in attaining heaven along with their children.

And a valid, non-sacramental (natural) marriage can be dissolved (i.e. ended) by the proper authority. A valid, sacramental marriage persists till the death of one of the spouses.

I don’t think that’s true. Otherwise non catholic christians wouldn’t have to seek an annulment before remarrying a Catholic

The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony can only take place between baptized Christians. Non-Christians can marry validly but it is not a Christian Sacrament.

It is true.

Your OP mentions “non-baptized Christian”, but I think you’re confusing terms here. A baptized person is a Christian; but a non-baptized person is not a Christian. So, I think the distinction to be made is between the baptized (whether these are Catholic or non-Catholic Christians) and the unbaptized.

A valid marriage between two Christians, by virtue of their baptism, is a sacrament. An unbaptized person cannot receive any other sacraments, so their marriage is non-sacramental, even if it’s invalid. (That means that Christians who marry unbaptized persons are in natural, not sacramental, marriages.) One practical implication is that valid sacramental marriages may never be dissolved, but valid natural marriages may be (by the competent authority).

Does that make sense? Does this help?

Blessings,
G.

Yes, it is true.

Baptized non-catholic Christians married to other baptized non-Catholic Christians have sacramental marriages.

Only marriages involving one or both unbaptized individuals are candidates for dissolution of the bond.

Also, of course, natural bonds can be invalid for various reasons of consent, impediment, or defect. If there is a strong indication the marriage is not valid, a nullity route might prove a better option.

There may also be impediments to using dissolution of the bond, such as proofs and cooperation of former spouses. There are all sorts of reasons a nullity case might be pursued instead.

Petrine privilege, also known as the privilege of the faith or favour of the faith, is a ground recognised in Catholic canon law allowing for dissolution by the Pope of a valid natural marriage between a baptised and a non-baptised person, for the sake of the salvation of the soul of someone who is thus enabled to marry in the Church.

+"Prior to reading and interpreting the Code of Canon Law, an individual must understand that the Church’s law recognizes various origins of law: divine and/or natural law which derives from God; human law which derives from a human legislator, either in the civil (secular) sphere or in the Church. Human laws deriving from a human legislator reflect the limitations inherent in any human activity; these laws can and do change. We may judge human laws, civil and ecclesiastical, on how well or how poorly such laws reflect natural and/or divine law. Certain norms are considered unchangeable, such as the indissolubility of marriage. Catholic Church teaching on marriage, therefore, and the application and interpretation of that teaching in our contemporary world (as has been done throughout the centuries of Church history) must take cognizance of that which can change and that which cannot change. …

A :highprayer: sacramental marriage, by the way, arises from two baptized people entering into marriage. The marriage of a Catholic and an unbaptized person may be graced by God but it is not a sacrament." * - Canon Lawyer Father Robert J. Kaslyn, S.J.*

Link: americamagazine.org/content/all-things/marriage-pope-francis-and-canon-law-21-questions-father-robert-kaslyn-sj

. . . :coffeeread: . . .

[INDENT]Canon Law Regarding the Holy :highprayer: Sacrament of Marriage for a Catholic . . .

MARRIAGE OF TWO BAPTIZED CHRISTIANS A SACRAMENT

**Can. 1055 **
[INDENT]§1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a :highprayer: sacrament between the baptized.

§2. For this reason, a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a :highprayer: sacrament.

Can. 1124 Without express permission of the competent authority, a marriage is prohibited between two baptized persons of whom one is **baptized **in the Catholic Church or received into it after baptism and has not defected from it by a formal act and the other of whom is enrolled in a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the Catholic Church.

Can. 1125 The local ordinary can grant a permission of this kind if there is a just and reasonable cause. He is not to grant it unless the following conditions have been fulfilled:

1/ the Catholic party is to declare that he or she is prepared to remove dangers of defecting from the faith and is to make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power so that all offspring are baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church;

2/ the other party is to be informed at an appropriate time about the promises which the Catholic party is to make, in such a way that it is certain that he or she is truly aware of the promise and obligation of the Catholic party;

3/ both parties are to be instructed about the purposes and essential properties of marriage which neither of the contracting parties is to exclude.

**Can. 1086 **
§1 A marriage between two persons, one of whom has been baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it and has not defected from it by a formal act and the other of whom is not baptized, is invalid.

§2. A person is not to be dispensed from this impediment unless the conditions mentioned in cann. 1125 and 1126 have been fulfilled.

And lastly, in a mixed marriage or disparity of cult marriage, the Catholic can be dispensed from Catholic form if they had a valid reason for marrying in the non-Catholic’s place of worship.

Can. 1117 The form established above must be observed if at least one of the parties contracting marriage was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it …] without prejudice to the prescripts of can. 1127, §2.

**Can. 1118 **
§1 A marriage between Catholics or between a Catholic party and a non-Catholic baptized party is to be celebrated in a parish church. It can be celebrated in another church or oratory with the permission of the local ordinary or pastor.

§2. The local ordinary can permit a marriage to be celebrated in another suitable place.

§3. A marriage between a Catholic party and a non-baptized party can be celebrated in a church or in another suitable place.[/INDENT][/INDENT]

[RIGHT]. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank you Holy Mother Church+
[/RIGHT]

canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/01/17/cath-marry-non-christian/

It’s interesting that canon law only has baptized Catholic, baptized non catholic, and non Christian designations… Yet a great majority of the Christian world is evangelical protestants who are not baptized yet Christian. So does the church put them in the same category as Muslims, who deny Jesus? That seems ridiculous

Also, I still don’t understand this natural marriage designation because why would the church demand evangelicals obtain an annulment before marrying a Catholic if their previous marriage could simply be dissolved?

Because that is all there is:

Christian or not

Within Christian, Catholic or not.

If they are not baptized, they are not actually Christians.

They are not baptized, in that way they are the same.

Do they “deny Jesus”? No.

Natural marriage is a function of being unbaptized.

What the Church requires is that the person is free to marry.

They could prove freedom to marry in a number of ways. Decree of nullity and dissolution of the bond are both options if not baptized.

A valid, sacramental but unconsummated marriage can be dissolved.

+*A gentle correction . . . *

[INDENT]:bible1: “Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” *- Matthew 28:19-20 *[/INDENT]Evangelical Christians and their many churches are normally . . . firm believers and practitioners . . . in complete obedience to Sacred :bible1: Scripture of baptism . . . using the Trinitarian Formula . . . “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” . . . and individuals from these backgrounds have been received into the Catholic Church . . . and their baptisms are considered completely valid . . . methods of baptism vary according to preference (even in the Catholic Church) . . . but as long as the Trinitarian Formula is used within a Christian church . . . the baptism is considered valid . . .

[RIGHT]. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Gracious Heavenly Father+[/RIGHT]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.