If you were Catholic and married to a Protestant (who wants the kids raised Protestant), would you just go to Mass alone? Or would you go to Protestant services for the sake of family togetherness? Or try to do both?
Protestant/Catholic marriage
- Thread starter Luna Novem
- Start date
Uncanny - the other day was talking to a co-worker it was stated that there were issues in the marriage at first because one spouse, who is Baptist (form of Protestant), did not agree with the spouse's Pentecostal (another form of Protestant) views. I wish I would have asked about what the issues were....
Most likely, the Baptist did not believe in speaking in tongues.
Rob Banks
Pelican
From my understanding lot of Protestant denominations (although not all) allow divorce and remarriage, where as Catholics who follow the traditional teaching do not.
Also, for a Catholic to marry a Protestant, the Catholic would have to get special permission from the bishop (or at least that's how it's supposed to be).
Also, for a Catholic to marry a Protestant, the Catholic would have to get special permission from the bishop (or at least that's how it's supposed to be).
Yeah that is a problem. Divorce and remarriage cannot be done save for sexual immorality. Otherwise its adultery.
I've found myself in a predicament where I met and married my husband along the way to finding my faith.
I come from a long line of Catholics on both sides of my family tree (Irish and Italian) all the way down to my parents, with my brothers and I probably being the first in the family tree to never be baptized and to not be raised Christian at all.
So I guess technically I am NOT Catholic (yet), but that is where my heritage AND my faith are calling me, quite clearly. This issue was kind of put on hold because the "pandemic" shut down all of the churches just as I was on the verge of mustering the nerve to go to a Mass for the first time, by myself, last year. That's going to be a hard thing to do when the churches eventually resume their regular services, especially after taking so long talking myself into it the first time around, just to have the churches shut down LITERALLY DAYS LATER.
I think if my husband were actually religious and actually wanted to attend church regularly, I might have previously made the decision to attend with him (he was born and raised Southern Baptist but has never been to church in all the time I've known him), and I might have been happy with that. I guess I don't know for sure, but that always used to be my mindset: just follow my husband.
I don't think I could do it at this point, though. Orthodox Christianity vs. Roman Catholicism, sure. I could probably do that. Protestant Christianity, no.
Edit: I feel kind of embarrassed to admit, but a big part of the WHY is that Protestant churches are not beautiful. Certainly not all are ugly, but I've never seen one that set my heart to aching like Catholic and Orthodox churches. After many long years of Mormon church, if you can't offer me something that offers greater glory to God and stirs the spirit to worship more fervently than floral sofas and carpet on the walls... do not want. Would rather sit and pray by the river.
I come from a long line of Catholics on both sides of my family tree (Irish and Italian) all the way down to my parents, with my brothers and I probably being the first in the family tree to never be baptized and to not be raised Christian at all.
So I guess technically I am NOT Catholic (yet), but that is where my heritage AND my faith are calling me, quite clearly. This issue was kind of put on hold because the "pandemic" shut down all of the churches just as I was on the verge of mustering the nerve to go to a Mass for the first time, by myself, last year. That's going to be a hard thing to do when the churches eventually resume their regular services, especially after taking so long talking myself into it the first time around, just to have the churches shut down LITERALLY DAYS LATER.
I think if my husband were actually religious and actually wanted to attend church regularly, I might have previously made the decision to attend with him (he was born and raised Southern Baptist but has never been to church in all the time I've known him), and I might have been happy with that. I guess I don't know for sure, but that always used to be my mindset: just follow my husband.
I don't think I could do it at this point, though. Orthodox Christianity vs. Roman Catholicism, sure. I could probably do that. Protestant Christianity, no.
Edit: I feel kind of embarrassed to admit, but a big part of the WHY is that Protestant churches are not beautiful. Certainly not all are ugly, but I've never seen one that set my heart to aching like Catholic and Orthodox churches. After many long years of Mormon church, if you can't offer me something that offers greater glory to God and stirs the spirit to worship more fervently than floral sofas and carpet on the walls... do not want. Would rather sit and pray by the river.
Last edited:
Rob Banks
Pelican
I assume the bolded part is referring to what Jesua said in Matthew 19.
There are different translations interpretations of what He said. Many (but not all) Protestant denominations interpret it as allowing divorce in the case of adultery. The traditional Church teaching, though, is that when Jesus said divorce was allowed "in cases of sexual immorality (Greek word porneia)," He was referring to cases where the bride lied about her virginity, in which case the man could invalidate the marriage (which is more like an annulment than a divorce).
In the other Gospels, Jesus is clear that divorce is never allowed.
That would mean divorce isn't allowed if adultery has already occurred. Or if either spouse is deliberately sexually frigid despite all efforts to fix that.
I don't think that works.
Rob Banks
Pelican
As long as the marriage was consummated, then there is no divorce no matter what (unless it is discovered that the bride lied about her virginity before marriage, or if it discovered that the bride and groom are siblings, or something crazy like that).
Adultery is not grounds for divorce and remarriage.
A woman I know put together this YouTube playlist deditaced to this very topic. Many of the videos go into detail about what the scriptures say regarding this topic.
Last edited:
So that means that the marital obligations is null and void for either spouse especially if they persist and wouldn't do anything to fix that.
Of course there could be sanctions as a result of church discipline but even so there is no way out otherwise. Not much of a solution I think.
Last edited:
I know this is reverse but I am Protestant, I go to a Baptist church but I thought hard about what churches I would go if I had no other option. I really think I would go to any, certainly Catholic and Orthodox and even Mormon. I am fairly discerning. I even think there is value in mixing up our churchgoing experience, i.e., I've been wanting to go to a hardcore charismatic Pentecostal service even though I am certain to not agree as much. Ultimately, a Christian is a Christian first and a denomination second.
The solution is that you are still married but in a difficult situation. You made a bad decision, didn't discern well, or simply bad luck and your spouse commited a serious sin. But you don't have permission to go wife hunting again.
The Catholic Church teaching is that the marital obligation is never voided, there is no such thing as divorce. It is a one time union, as taught in the Book of Genesis (one flesh) and when Jesus Christ our Lord and saviour ordered us not to put away our wives, except for adultery. As it was explained to me by a Priest, it is actually very biblical. There is a practice that has been growing since the 60s of "annulling" the marriage. You might have heard this term, it basically is saying the marriage didn't happen or is nullified due to a specific cause at the time of the marriage. For example, marrying a person who misrepresents their belief in Christ could be grounds for nullification, being a 1st cousin, and certain other.
So essentially if your wife runs around on you then you either take her back or "put her away" (live seperately). There are old Catholic Couples like this who simply live seperately but are still married and do not search for others. My understanding is that the person who is cheated on doesn't need to sleep with their spouse again, but if they do then they are reconciled and have to forgive the person. Also, an interesting thing this Priest mentioned, if a wife doesn't sleep with her husband, and he commits adultery, she bears some of the fault as she scandalized him, by not fulfilling her wifely duty. The same is true in reverse. So the person who didn't give their spouse enough 'love' is culpable and must go to the confessional also. I can imagine people having a difficult time with this, but that is more about the state of our times.
A Catholic can marry a Protestant with a Dispensation (lifting of the law/exception) from the Bishop. But only if the Protestant or Orthodox, Atheist, Muslim, Jew Etc (ok basically non Catholic) agrees to raise the Children in the Catholic Faith. If the person is a Christian then a the sacrament of marriage is binding, but if the person is a non Christian then there is no marital sacramental graces with the sacrament as the other person is not a Baptized Christian.
A Catholic who marries outside the Catholic Church is involving themselves in an invalid marriage outside the Church. I'm not sure if they could go to communion, as I'm not sure how they could confess this sin and have it absolved,so they would be seen as fornicating I think.
Hope this helps, this is my understanding.
Last edited:
Makes sense. Although for now I will disagree. I will do more research and may change my mind God willing. Unless God shows me otherwise.
“You can’t serve two masters.” “A house divided will fall.”
One of my brothers is married to a Catholic and it’s caused a bit of a rift between them and my parents who are Protestant. This brother’s family lives in town but her family is on the other side of the country so my mom is routinely hurt that they won’t attend church with us. My brother grew up in the church we attend and so everyone always asks my parents what is [brother’s name] doing, why isn’t he here, etc. My mom doesn’t understand that someone who is Catholic, technically, isn’t allowed to attend church anywhere else but a Catholic Church (although we’ve had a few couples attend who were Cath/Prot attend 50/50; I can’t speak to whether that’s ok or not). Personally, I think my SIL uses this as an excuse to not sit with my parents (who are wonderful people to her btw... but that’s a different story/drama). So my brother goes to Mass with his family but he hasn’t taken communion for... I don’t know how many years... at *either* church. He’s kind of.. adrift, in a way. Not really belonging on either side anymore. He had started the process of officially converting to Catholicism (much to my mother’s sadness, mostly because she wants to see (and others to see too, grandparents can be very proud lol) her family around her at church) but it ended up halted because of the COVID lockdowns.
Obviously, if the couple are the same denomination that makes everything much more simple. Even in my own situation (Protestant married to an Orthodox) it caused a strain between families of where the future children will be baptized. You can’t win either way, someone will always be disappointed...
But to directly answer you question:
I know some people aren’t as hardlined but this is how it is “according to the rules”. The tricky part is that Catholics generally don’t allow for ecumenism while Protestants do. A Protestant *can* go to a Catholic Mass but a Catholic *can’t* got to a Protestant church service.
My advice is that the person should convert to their spouse’s denomination before marriage because after the wedding Life starts happening and then everyone gets busy, etc, etc...
Anyway, the moral of the story is that it’s better if they both are from the same Christian tradition.
One of my brothers is married to a Catholic and it’s caused a bit of a rift between them and my parents who are Protestant. This brother’s family lives in town but her family is on the other side of the country so my mom is routinely hurt that they won’t attend church with us. My brother grew up in the church we attend and so everyone always asks my parents what is [brother’s name] doing, why isn’t he here, etc. My mom doesn’t understand that someone who is Catholic, technically, isn’t allowed to attend church anywhere else but a Catholic Church (although we’ve had a few couples attend who were Cath/Prot attend 50/50; I can’t speak to whether that’s ok or not). Personally, I think my SIL uses this as an excuse to not sit with my parents (who are wonderful people to her btw... but that’s a different story/drama). So my brother goes to Mass with his family but he hasn’t taken communion for... I don’t know how many years... at *either* church. He’s kind of.. adrift, in a way. Not really belonging on either side anymore. He had started the process of officially converting to Catholicism (much to my mother’s sadness, mostly because she wants to see (and others to see too, grandparents can be very proud lol) her family around her at church) but it ended up halted because of the COVID lockdowns.
Obviously, if the couple are the same denomination that makes everything much more simple. Even in my own situation (Protestant married to an Orthodox) it caused a strain between families of where the future children will be baptized. You can’t win either way, someone will always be disappointed...
But to directly answer you question:
I feel like this discussion should’ve happened before the wedding lol... But anyway, a Catholic can’t (or isn’t supposed to) go to any other service. So they go to Catholic Mass alone (because it is a sin to miss Mass) or with their family in tow and the Protestant can go to their Prot church but (technically) can’t bring their kids or spouse because they’re Catholic (because they would’ve been baptized Catholic).
I know some people aren’t as hardlined but this is how it is “according to the rules”. The tricky part is that Catholics generally don’t allow for ecumenism while Protestants do. A Protestant *can* go to a Catholic Mass but a Catholic *can’t* got to a Protestant church service.
My advice is that the person should convert to their spouse’s denomination before marriage because after the wedding Life starts happening and then everyone gets busy, etc, etc...
Anyway, the moral of the story is that it’s better if they both are from the same Christian tradition.
Anyone have any insight into whether it's going to be harder to be baptized Catholic, given that I am already married to a Protestant?
And given the requirement to raise the children Catholic... would they be expected to be baptized at the same time I am? What kind of issues might there be if their dad (ex-H) raised a stink about it and didn't want me to have them baptized? I think our "parenting plan" gives 50/50 on those sorts of decisions.
I don't think my ex would have much of a leg to stand on, and I don't necessarily think he'd object much anyway... But if he DID, could that prevent ME from being baptized?
And given the requirement to raise the children Catholic... would they be expected to be baptized at the same time I am? What kind of issues might there be if their dad (ex-H) raised a stink about it and didn't want me to have them baptized? I think our "parenting plan" gives 50/50 on those sorts of decisions.
I don't think my ex would have much of a leg to stand on, and I don't necessarily think he'd object much anyway... But if he DID, could that prevent ME from being baptized?
No I don't think there would be any impedient, but you would want to speak to a Priest.
The Children could get baptized with you, that would be good, but I don't see how it would be a requirement.
The rules are different for people who are Catholic, vs. those who enter. For instance, you married when you weren't a Catholic, you weren't baptized or Catechized (taught the faith) so you are not in the Church now, so if one soul enters the Church then the Angels will indeed sing.
With your children, I think the Mother and Father must both consent to Baptism. So if your husband consents then they can be baptized. If not you can be a light of the faith to them and hope and pray that they decide to be baptized when they reach an appropriate age. This could be what the Church calls the age of reason (7?) or later in life when God calls them.
These questions are best answered by a Priest, ideally the one at the Parish where you are considering beginning your Catechism and going to get baptized.
I am Orthodox and was baptized the same day as my two younger siblings in 2019. The youngest wasn't quite an adult at 17 years old, and we had to get written permission from both of our parents consenting to his baptism. At least in my state, it can be a very serious legal matter unfortunately and my priest was worried about my parents as they are divorced and were raised more "anti-Catholic" than they were raised Protestant if that makes sense.
The woman is called his helpmeet, his mirror. And even as he mirrors God, she mirrors him. He understands his responsibility by looking to God and he can see how he is fulfilling his responsibility, and how he is proving his obedience in relationship to his wife as she mirrors his nature and responsibility.
Thus when God felt that Adam had proven himself by his obedience and by his responsibility he caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept, and he took one of his ribs. Or the word here can also be read “took of his flank, or his side” so it can be read and translated either his rib or from the side of him. And made He a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said “This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh”.
This is a magnificent statement, and part of it is almost untranslatable because the word “this is now” is an idiom in the Hebrew which has meaning comparable to what we say when we say “I’ve got the beat” this is the beat, this is the rhythm of the music. Now I’ve found myself, here is the beat, the rhythm of my life that I’ve been waiting for. I have found it; this is now the beat, bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh. The bone of my bone means the structure of my life, the skeleton is the structure of the body, it is that which supports the body. And so when Adam says she is bone of my bone, the structure of my being is the structure of her being, flesh of my flesh, the very life of me is the life of her; so I find myself, I realize myself in terms of her.
From this the first marriage we have a pattern established, which is to be the pattern of all marriage. And certainly since she is to be a helpmeet to him in terms of his calling, mixed marriages religiously are thus from the Biblical perspective wrong.
A Christian should not marry an unbeliever, or a person of another religion, because a Christian to fulfill himself in terms of his calling must marry someone who is a help as before him, someone who mirrors that which he is.
And similarly how can the woman be that mirror, that bone of bone and flesh of flesh, and have the community that comes from being the reflected image of the man if she marries someone when what she is in terms of her background is so different from that which he is.
So they must have a common faith, or it is not according to the law of God, a valid marriage.
Moreover is she is to be a help as before him, a mirror, there must be a common cultural background. And this militates against marriages across cultures and across races where there is no common culture or association possible.
The new unit is a continuation of the old unit, but an independent one. And there has to be a unity or else it is not a marriage.
And thus the attempts of many today to say there is nothing in the Bible against mixed marriages, whether religiously or spiritually is altogether unfounded.
(Quoted excerpts)
Thus when God felt that Adam had proven himself by his obedience and by his responsibility he caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept, and he took one of his ribs. Or the word here can also be read “took of his flank, or his side” so it can be read and translated either his rib or from the side of him. And made He a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said “This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh”.
This is a magnificent statement, and part of it is almost untranslatable because the word “this is now” is an idiom in the Hebrew which has meaning comparable to what we say when we say “I’ve got the beat” this is the beat, this is the rhythm of the music. Now I’ve found myself, here is the beat, the rhythm of my life that I’ve been waiting for. I have found it; this is now the beat, bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh. The bone of my bone means the structure of my life, the skeleton is the structure of the body, it is that which supports the body. And so when Adam says she is bone of my bone, the structure of my being is the structure of her being, flesh of my flesh, the very life of me is the life of her; so I find myself, I realize myself in terms of her.
From this the first marriage we have a pattern established, which is to be the pattern of all marriage. And certainly since she is to be a helpmeet to him in terms of his calling, mixed marriages religiously are thus from the Biblical perspective wrong.
A Christian should not marry an unbeliever, or a person of another religion, because a Christian to fulfill himself in terms of his calling must marry someone who is a help as before him, someone who mirrors that which he is.
And similarly how can the woman be that mirror, that bone of bone and flesh of flesh, and have the community that comes from being the reflected image of the man if she marries someone when what she is in terms of her background is so different from that which he is.
So they must have a common faith, or it is not according to the law of God, a valid marriage.
Moreover is she is to be a help as before him, a mirror, there must be a common cultural background. And this militates against marriages across cultures and across races where there is no common culture or association possible.
The new unit is a continuation of the old unit, but an independent one. And there has to be a unity or else it is not a marriage.
And thus the attempts of many today to say there is nothing in the Bible against mixed marriages, whether religiously or spiritually is altogether unfounded.
(Quoted excerpts)